values for the organic acids from their sodium
salts, he calculated the dissociations of these acids. He also calculated
dissociation constants by means of Ostwald's dilution law. His dis-
sociation values decrease slowly with increase in alcohol. The con-
stants decrease much more rapidly for the same increase in alcohol.
Wakeman plotted curves (fig. 21) with molecular conductivities as
ordinates and percentage alcohol as abscissa, and showed that when
they were extended beyond 50 per cent alcohol in the direction of 100
per cent alcohol, the conductivity probably approached zero as a limit.
He concluded that dissociation in the mixtures is much less than would
Publication 170, Part II, Carnegie Inst. Wash.; see also Amer. Chem. Journ., 44, 156 (1910) ;
46, 56 (1911); 48, 320, 411 (1912); 50, 1 (1913).
2 Zeit. phys. Chem., 4, 429 (1889).
3 Ibid., 11, 49 (1893).
4 Mem. de 1'Acad. de St. Petersb., VII series, vol. 30, 9 (1882).
6 Zeit. phys. Chem., 2, 270 (1888) ; ibid., 3, 170 (1889) ; see also, Amer. Chem. Journ., 46, 66 (1911).
64
CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL. 65
be expected, and that the Ostwald dilution law could not be applied
to the mixtures containing much alcohol.
In 1894 Schall 1 determined the conductivity of oxalic, dichloracetic,
picric, and hydrochloric acids in methyl alcohol, in ethyl alcohol,
in ethyl alcohol-water mixtures, and in isobutyl alcohol. He con-
cluded from his results that
molecular conductivity is much
less in the alcohols than in
water, and that the acids be-
have very differently in alcohol-
water mixtures than in the pure
solvents; some acting just the
opposite from what might be
expected from their behavior in
the pure solvents. For in-
stance, picric acid gives a much
higher, and the others much
lower, conductivity values in
water-alcohol mixtures than in
the pure alcohol.
A careful piece of work on
the conductivity of certain
organic acids, acetic, mono-
chloracetic, dichloracetic, tri-
chloracetic, and succinic acids,
and of hydrochloric acid in
absolute alcohol at 18 was
carried out, in 1894, by Wil-
dermann. 2 The alcohol was
freed from aldehyde by treat-
ment with silver nitrate, and
from water by heating with
calcium oxide. Great care
was exercised in protecting
the alcohol from the air, and
a special apparatus was con-
structed for drawing a meas-
ured quantity of alcohol out of
the supply bottle directly into
the conductivity cell, which had a capacity of about 25 c.c. In order
to make his minimum points on the bridge more distinct, Wildermann
employed a graphite resistance rheostat which he constructed and
standardized against a known resistance. He states that his con-
ductivity cells had to be washed with running water for about 8 to 10
FIG. 21. Monobromacetic acid.
! Zeit. phys. Chem., 14, 701 (1894).
2 Ibid., 14, 231 (1894).
66 CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
days. On washing with alcohol and drying, it was found that the
alcohol which was in contact with the platinum electrodes was oxid-
ized by the air, even when this was thoroughly purified and dried, to
acetic acid, which, of course, increased the conductivity of the alcohol.
Therefore, instead of drying after washing with water and draining,
alcohol was introduced so as first to wash the glass walls, and then the
alcohol was allowed to cover the electrodes. Some of this alcohol was
then drawn off by means of a pipette and fresh alcohol was introduced,
keeping the electrodes continuously covered, until all the water had
been eliminated and the conductivity values after each removal and
addition of fresh alcohol remained unchanged. Says Wildermann, "this
cost a half day of work and 300 to 500 c.c. of good absolute alcohol."
The same procedure was adopted for dilute solutions of the acids, the
strength of any solution being determined by titration. He does not
give any tables of his results with the weaker acids acetic, mono-
chloracetic, and succinic. He simply makes the qualitative statement
that these substances between volumes 10 and 160 give a molecular
conductivity which increases approximately proportional to the square
root of the volumes; that is ^!L is about equal to ,. pi, v being the
greater of the two volumes.
Wildermann draws the following conclusions:
"(1) Under about 10 liters for dichloracetic acid, the values of are
Mr
less than those of + ', above about 10 liters the value of is
_ \ Mr
greater than J^l; in dilutions from 800 to 2,000 liters the values of
become almost equal to . The increase of is therefore con-
M. v Mr
tinuous, not only in the concentrated solutions, but also in the more
dilute solutions to which the equation ^ -v=k may be applied."
"(2) The same conclusions are even more nearly true in the case of
/3-resorcylic acid."
(3) In the case of trichloracetic acid there is, just as above, an increase
in from 20 to 300 liters, above which the value becomes almost
Mr Mr
equal to I^L and then increases throughout the more dilute solutions.
\v
That this is true, even at a different temperature from 18, is shown
in some later work by the author, using an entirely independent method.
An explanation, however, had already been offered for the phenomenon
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL. 67
in a previous paper by the author. 1 In this earlier work he was studying
the effect of the presence of the large amount of the undissociated por-
tion of weakly dissociated acids, upon the conductivity and dissocia-
tion values and upon the dissociation constants. It had been pointed
out by Ostwald that in aqueous solutions the degree of dissociation,
for the same dilutions of trichloracetic, dichloracetic, monochloracetic,
and acetic acids shows a decrease in passing from the trichlor derivative
to the acetic acid in the order named. A like succession was observed
by Wildermann for the same acids in alcohol.
(4) For hydrochloric acid in alcohol, results analogous to those in
water were obtained. A maximum value of the conductivity was noted.
In summing up, Wildermann says that it is possible to apply the
Kohlrausch method to the determination of the conductivity of strong
organic or inorganic acids in absolute alcohol, but that no reliable
results could be obtained for such weak acids as acetic, monochloracetic,
and succinic. He remarks that much time and patience on the part of
the experimenter are required to obtain results that are at all reliable.
In a second investigation by Wildermann 2 the same acids as in the
earlier work were studied, using in this case a precision galvanometer
method and working at 25 instead of at 18. He arrived at precisely
the same conclusions as before, except that he found the precision
method susceptible of more general application than that of Kohlrausch.
Among those who have worked on conductivity in alcohol since
Wildermann are, Zelinsky and Krapiwin, 3 who determined the conduc-
tivity of a number of inorganic salts and acid salts of organic acids ;
Ernest Cohen, 4 who obtained the conductivity and dissociation of
several inorganic salts in absolute methyl alcohol at 18, and who
states that because of the action of the platinum electrodes upon the
solutions, measurements were unsafe at higher temperatures; Roth, 5
whose work had to do with the conductivity of potassium chloride in
alcohol-water mixtures; and others of minor importance.
Some still more recent work 6 has been done in this laboratory with
inorganic salts both in methyl and in ethyl alcohol and alcohol-water
mixtures, but it need not be discussed here. (See Chapter IV.)
EXPERIMENTAL.
The conductivity apparatus used for making the measurements
was similar to that employed in previous work in this laboratory, except
that on account of the high resistances offered by the alcoholic solutions
of the acids, it was necessary to make use entirely of the cylindrical
type of conductivity-cell. The method of obtaining their constants
has previously been described 7 and need not be dealt with here.
^Ber. d. chem. Gesell., 26, 1782-1783 (1893). *Ibid., 42, 209 (1903).
2 Zeit. phys. Chem., 14, 247 (1894). Carnegie Inst, Wash. Pubs. Nos. 80 and 180.
*Ibid., 21, 35 (1896). 7 Amer. Chem. Journ., 42, 527 (1909); 44, 64
4 Ibid., 25, 1 (1898). (1911).
68
CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
Since the percentage temperature coefficients of conductivity for
substances in alcohol, as well as the coefficient of expansion of the
alcohol itself, are so large, it is necessary to have fairly close tempera-
ture regulation. This was secured by the combination of a specially
devised gas regulator and thermo-regu-
lator. These have already been de-
scribed 1 in earlier papers.
In cooperation with Dr. P. B. Davis,
of the Chemical Laboratory of the Johns
Hopkins University, a new form of con-
stant-temperature bath was also de-
signed. Its construction can be seen
from fig. 22. A full discussion of the
form finally adopted will be presented in
a paper soon to be published by Jones,
Davis, and Putnam. 2 In these baths the
temperature ordinarily does not vary
more than 0.02 C., which is sufficiently
constant for our purpose. With special
precautions as to insulation from changes
in temperatures, and a further modified
form of the thermo-regulator, the varia-
tion can be decreased to a few thousandths
of a degree. Aside from the better
temperature regulation obtained in this
new form of thermostat-bath, there are
also one or two other advantages derived from its use. The apparatus
is of copper which does not rust, and the stirring arrangements and
the cooling coil are on the side, and are therefore out of the way.
A number of minor improvements were likewise added.
Solutions were made up in 200 c.c. flasks calibrated for 25, and
the conductivity measurements of these solutions were taken at 15,
25, and 35. Pipettes were frequently used for measuring purposes
because of greater ease in handling. They were carefully calibrated.
Corrections for the expansion and contraction of the alcoholic solutions
at 35 and 15, respectively, were of course applied to the conductivity
measurements.
The alcohol was prepared by heating ordinary 95 per cent alcohol
for several days with fresh, unslaked lime in a copper tank, provided
with a ground-brass stopper and reflux condenser, and then distilling
through a block-tin condenser. The distillate thus prepared was
reheated with fresh lime and again distilled, the first and last portions
^eit. phya. Chem., 85, 519 (1913); Journ. Chim. Phys. July 1914.
2 See Chapter VI of this monograph.
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL. 69
of this distillate being discarded. A few sticks of sodium hydroxide
added during the last day of heating insured the removal from the
distillate of any aldehyde which might have been present, and which
otherwise would have distilled over with the alcohol. It is possible,
by taking proper precautions in the manner of handling, to obtain by
such a method alcohol having a specific gravity of 0.78506, to within
the limits of experimental error, +0.00002. According to Circular
19 of the Bureau of Standards, alcohol with this specific gravity has
no water in it ; that is, it is 100 per cent alcohol. The alcohol employed
in the conductivity measurements varied in specific gravity from the
value of 0.78506 to 0.78517, the latter containing 99.964 per cent
alcohol. The receiver for the distillate was a 6-liter Jena glass bottle.
The stopper was a three-holed paraffined cork. Through one hole
passed a siphon, through another an adapter with a glass stopcock,
and through the third a calcium chloride-soda lime tube also having a
glass stopcock. In this way the alcohol was well protected during
distillation from impurities in the air, and small quantities sufficient
for making up the solutions could be drawn off without exposing the
main supply. After weighing out the quantity of dried and purified acid
necessary to make a solution of the required normality, the acid was
washed off the watch glass or out of the weighing bottle into a funnel,
and then into a 200 c.c. Jena flask which had previously been thoroughy
washed with water, and then with some of the alcohol with which the
solution was to be made up. The flask was filled to the neck with
alcohol and shaken until all the acid had dissolved. It was finally
hung in a 25 thermostat-bath until temperature equilibrium was
reached, and then filled to the mark. In the meantime a conductivity-
cell which had been thoroughly washed the day before and in which
pure alcohol had been allowed to stand over night, was dried with
filtered dry air. It was then rinsed several times with portions of the
solution which had just been made up, and finally nearly filled with
this solution introduced as shown in figure 23. A little carbonate is
formed by opening in this way to the air, but it is a very small quantity,
and in the course of a few days is entirely precipitated to the bottom
of the bottle. T and T' are filled with a mixture of calcium chloride
and soda-lime to protect the alcoholic solution when the stopcocks
S and S are opened. The stoppers in T and T f are of cork and are
thoroughly paraffined. A system such as this remains protected from
the air for a period of several months.
The alcoholic solution, in course of time, becomes colored slightly
yellow, but its alkaline concentration is apparently not changed, as can
be seen by comparing titrations made against a standard acid in
February and again in May:
On Feb. 25, 10 c.c. of standard acid = 8.87 c.c. of alkali.
On May 7, 10 c.c. of standard acid = 8.87 c.c. of alkali.
70
CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
The bottle containing the alkali was covered with a dark material,
since, in the presence of light the tendency of the alkaline solution to
become colored is much greater than in the dark.
One of the greatest difficulties in connection with the alcoholic pot-
ash method was that of temperature changes. The coefficient of expan-
sion of alcohol is so large that even small changes in the temperature of
the laboratory, and consequent changes in temperature of the solu-
tion, will change quite appreciably the normality of the alkali.
It was this difficulty which led us to the use of an B
aqueous solution of ammonia with coralline as j
the indicator, instead of the alcoholic caustic FIG. 24.
potash with phenolphthalein as the indicator.
The ammonia was prepared by heating concentrated ammonia and
passing the gas which was given off, first over sticks of sodium hydrox-
ide, which collected a large part of the water-vapor and any carbon
dioxide, and then over sodium, which absorbed the remainder of the
water- vapor; and finally into a weighed quantity of conductivity water
in a measuring flask until the approximate amount of the gas necessary
to make a tenth-normal solution was dissolved. This solution was
titrated against standard sulphuric acid to obtain its exact normality.
Coralline was used as the indicator because it is sensitive to the
organic acids, and is not sensitive to carbon dioxide except when the
latter is present in fairly large quantity. In order to test whether
coralline is sensitive to small quantities of carbon dioxide, another
worker in this laboratory measured out two equal quantities of a
standard acid, added an equal amount of coralline to each, and then
allowed carbon dioxide to bubble through one of these solutions for
some minutes. Titrations of both solutions were made, and practically
no effect due to the presence of carbon dioxide was found. Equal
volumes of a standard acid were again titrated, this time after having
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL. 71
passed carbon dioxide into one of the solutions for a considerable time.
There was a small difference in the titration values. In both cases
the amount of carbon dioxide passed into the solutions was infinitely
more than would ordinarily be present in such solution as we were
titrating.
It was at first thought advisable to use an alcoholic solution of
potassium hydroxide for titration purposes. There are, however,
several difficulties involved. An approximately tenth-normal solution
of potassium hydroxide in absolute alcohol was made up and allowed
to stand for a couple of days. The carbonate settled, leaving a clear
supernatant solution. But if the bottle was opened even for a very
short time the solution became cloudy, and when poured into a burette
became white with precipitated carbonate.
A method of filtering the solution, being a modification of one pre-
viously used in this laboratory, was then adopted, together with an
arrangement for siphoning the solution out of the bottle into the
burette. Figure 23 shows the design of the filtering apparatus. The
tower T contains sticks of sodium hydroxide and T' is partly filled
with metallic sodium. The former acts as a protecting agent to
the latter, which serves both for removing the last traces of carbon
dioxide and for drying the air. B is a clean empty bottle which is
later interchanged with a bottle filled with an alcoholic solution
of potassium hydroxide prepared from freshly distilled alcohol. The
tube E is connected with suction, so that dried, purified air passes
through the whole system, including the Gooch funnel F, containing
asbestos previously washed with an alcoholic solution of potassium
hydroxide and then pure alcohol, and through the receiving bottle A.
When the system has been thoroughly cleansed with dry air free from
carbon dioxide, the stopcocks S are closed, and the bottle B is replaced
by the one containing alcoholic potash. The stopcocks are then
opened and suction again applied to E. When all the solution has
been filtered, A is removed, and, as quickly as possible, the stopper
arranged to connect it by a siphon with the burette (fig. 24). It was
found necessary to use 8 to 10 drops of the solution of coralline in alco-
hol for each titration. Even then the end-point is not quite as sharp
and distinct as with phenolphthalein.
When calculating the concentration of the organic acid in the alco-
hol from the values obtained by titrating against ammonia, it was found
that a slightly different value for the concentration was obtained from
that found from the titrations against alcoholic caustic potash. We
decided, if possible, to find the cause of this and to apply any necessary
corrections. A known quantity of the standard sulphuric acid was
titrated against alcoholic potassium hydroxide, using phenolphthalein as
the indicator. Several titrations were made in every case, and then an
equal quantity of the acid was titrated against the base, using coralline.
72 CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
The results in the latter case did not agree with those in the former
by about 0.2 c.c., 10 c.c. of acid being employed in each case. That
the difference was not due to carbon dioxide which might have been
dissolved in the sulphuric acid, can be seen from the fact that the same
difference appeared in the titrations with an organic acid dissolved in
absolute alcohol in which carbon dioxide is not very soluble.
It was found that if the same quantity of phenolphthalein or coralline
used when making the ordinary titrations was added either to pure
alcohol or to water, and if these solutions of the indicators alone were
titrated against the alkali and then back against the standard acid,
an appreciable quantity of alkali was required to change the color in
one direction, and about as much of the standard acid to change it in
the reverse direction, the alkali and acid being of very nearly the same
strength. Corrections for the amounts of alkali and acid necessary to
produce such color changes were then applied to the titration volumes
of the sulphuric acid and alcoholic potash, when agreement to within
the limits of experimental error was obtained between the results for
the two indicators.
In all the titrations in which alcoholic potassium hydroxide was used
its temperature was recorded, and when different from 25, which was
chosen as the standard temperature, a volume correction was applied.
It was easy, and was found necessary as well, to keep all the other
solutions, particularly those of the organic acids in alcohol, as well as
the alcoholic potash, at the standard temperature.
The titration values of the ammonia and standard acid were also
corrected, as just stated, for the amounts necessary to produce color
change, and the concentration of the ammonia was then calculated.
The normality of 1-2-4 dinitrobenzoic acid in alcohol was determined
from this standardized ammonia, making the same corrections as
above; and it agreed to within 0.2 per cent with that obtained by
means of potassium hydroxide. Similar corrections were, therefore,
applied to the titrations of all the organic acids.
The sulphuric acid used to standardize the alkali was made up in
large quantity, and its normality determined by the usual barium-
sulphate method.
Owing to the large amount of preliminary work required, it has been
possible up to the present to make conductivity measurements of only
9 organic acids. The same methods of purifying the acids were
employed as when the conductivities of these acids were determined in
aqueous solution. In most cases the various dilutions were made up
by directly weighing the acid.
In the work in alcohol it was necessary to discard all of the weaker
organic acids; this, in spite of the fact that our cell constants were about
eight times smaller than those of Wildermann. After trying acetic
acid several times, we gave up hope of obtaining satisfactory results
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL.
73
with such weak acids. Even the strongest acids with which we worked
do not give a molecular conductivity greater than unity.
Titrations of the acids against the standard alkali were made simul-
taneously with the conductivity measurements at every temperature.
At first the alcoholic solution of the acid was not kept at a constant
temperature, but it was soon found that in order to obtain comparable
results, and to avoid the considerable fluctuations of laboratory tem-
perature, it was necessary to have all the solutions continuously at one
temperature, preferably at 25.
RESULTS.
In the following tables of conductivity, V m signifies the volume for
which the solutions were made up ; V c is the corrected volume. The
corrections applied were both for expansion or contraction of the alco-
hol, and for change in the concentration of the acid due to formation
of ester. Molecular conductivity was calculated in the usual manner.
Temperature coefficients and percentage temperature coefficients are
expressed for 10 degrees. The specific conductivities of the alcohol as
given are all multiplied by 10 3 . They are really of the magnitude 10~ 7 .
TABLE 23. Molecular conductivities, temperature coefficients, etc., of certain acids.
Malonic acid.
O'Chlorobenzoic acid.
v m
V c
Mr
Time of reading.
v m
F.
Ht>
Time of reading.
15
16
8
8.12
0.0190
Apr. 16, l h 00 m p.m.
8
8.14
0.01303
Mar. 18, 10 h 40 p.m.
32
32.9
0.0434
16, 1
05 p.m.
32
33.1
0.01530
18, 10
45 p.m.
128
129.3
0.0775
17,12
20 p.m.
128
129.5
0.0279
19, 10
50 p.m.
512 512.8
0.2533
17,12
45 p.m.
512
513.8
0.1330
19, 11
15 p.m.
Alcohol Sp. cond.
0.000254
16, 1
10 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000531
18,11
20 p.m.
Alcohol Sp. cond.
0.000246
17,12
45 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond. . 000540
19,11
30 p.m.
25
9P
8 8.13
0.0237
16, 2
35 p.m.
8
8.16 0.0159
18,11
20 a.m.
32 33.20
0.0555
16, 2
40 p.m.
32
33.60
0.0198
18,11
45 a.m.
128 129.5
0.0985
17, 2
40 p.m.
128
129.7
0.0371
19,12
35 p.m.
512
514.9
0.3160
17, 2
45 p.m.
512
516.5
0.1714
19,12
40 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000257
16, 2
45 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000578
18,11
50 a.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000249
17, 2
50 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000622
19,12
45 p.m.
35
35
8
8.18
0.0319
16, 4
30 p.m.
8
8.28
0.0197
18, 4
45 p.m.
32
33.7
0.0737
16, 4
35 p.m.
32
34.9
0.0271
18, 4
50 p.m.
128
129.6
0.1351
17, 4
20 p.m.
128
129.8
0.0555
19, 4
55 p.m.
512
518.1
0.4338
17, 4
25 p.m.
512
519.9
0.2497
19, 5
00 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond. 0.000258
16, 4
40 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000637
18, 5
00 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000246
17, 4
30 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000711
19, 5
10 p.m.
Temperature coefficients.
Temperature coefficients.
v m
15 to 25
25 to 35
v m
15 to 25
25 to 35
Con. unit. P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
8
0.0046
24.5
0.0075
32.2
8
0.00281
21.1
0.0040
25.9
32
0.0113
26.7
0.0165
30.7
32
0.00407
27.5
0.0060
31.2
128
0.0207
26.9
0.0360
37.0
128
0.00903
32.8
0.0181
49.2
512
0.0613 24.2
0.1145
36.4
512
0.0374
28.1
0.0759
44.6
74
CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
TABLE 23. Molecular conductivities, temperature coefficients, etc., of certain acids Continued.
p-Chlorobenzoic acid.
o-Nitrobenzoic acid.
v m v c
MP
Time of reading.
v m
V c
Me
Time of reading.
15
15
8
10.0
0.0017
Mar.26,12 h 30 m p.m.
8
8.21
0.00785
Apr. 23, 12 h 35 m p.m.
32
33.69
0.0082
26,12
35 p.m.
32
33.19
0.0204
23,12
40 p.m.
128
129.7
0.0157
Apr. 1, 12
30 p.m.
128
129.3
0.0460
27,12
30 p.m.
512
514.8
0.1263
1, 12
35 p.m.
512
512.5
0.1788
27, 12
25 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000585
Mar. 26, 12
40 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000232 23 12
50 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000586
Apr. 1,12
45 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000227 27 12
35 p.m.
25
%o
8
10.08
0.0025
Mar. 26, 2
50 p.m.
8
8.27
0.00937
23, 2
20 p.m.
32
34.18
0.0117
26, 2
55 p.m.
32
34.30
0.0253
23, 2
40 p.m.
128
130.3
0.0189
Apr. 1, 3
10 p.m.
128
129.5
0.0477
27, 2
40 p.m.
512
520.0
0.1547
1, 3
15 p.m.
512
517.0
0.2452
27, 2
50 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000650 Mar. 26, 3
00 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000242 23, 2
50 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000656 Apr. 1, 3
20 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000238 27, 2
50 p.m.
35
35
8
10.11
0.0035
Mar. 26, 4
40 p.m.
8
8.27
0.0120 23, 4
30 p.m.
32
34.9
0.0160
26, 4
45 p.m.
32
34.95
0.0337 23,
35 p.m.
128
130.9
0.0270
Apr. 3, 4
10 p.m.
128
129.6
0.0734 27,
30 p.m.
512
522.7
0.1853
3, 4
15 p.m.
512
518.5
0.2877 27,
35 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000753
Mar. 26, 4
50 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000237 23,
45 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000827
Apr. 3, 4
20 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000232 27,
40 p.m.
Temperature coefficients.
Temperature coefficients.
v m
15 to 25
25 to 35
V m
15 to 25
25 to 35
Con. unit. P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
8
0.00052 42.2
0.00079
39.8
8
0.00142
18.56
0.0025
27.45
32
0.00315 40.2
0.00382
34.7
32
0.0040
20.31 0.0073
30.90
128
0.00314 19.9
0.0079
42.4
512
0.0642
35.94 0.0413
17.00
512
0268 27 2
0293
1Q 9
iy . _
p-Nitrobenzoic acid.
p-Bromobenzoic acid.
v m
V c
Mr
Time of reading.
v m
V c
MP
Time of reading.
15
15
8
8.147
0.00264
Apr. 28, Il h 40 m a.m.
32
32.96
0.0102
Apr. 21, 12 h 05 m p.m.
32
32.57
0.01252
28,11
45 a.m.
128
129.2
0.0516
21,12
10 p.m.
128
129.1
0.0349
29,11
10 a.m.
512
512.8
0.1417
22, 12
05 p.m.
512
512.8
0.1651
29, 11
15 a.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000237
21,12
15 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000217
28,11
50 a.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000236
22,12
15 p.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000214
29,11
20 a.m.
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
0.000231
22,12
20 p.m.
25
25
8
8.24
0.00353
28, 2
00 p.m.
32
33.61
0.0151
21, 2
45 p.m.
32
33.3
0.0147
28, 2
10 p.m.
128
129.3
0.0570
21, 2
50 p.m.
128
129.2
0.0418
29,12
25 p.m.
512
517.6
0.1814
22, 2
35 p.m.
512
Alcohol
Alcohol
517.5
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
0.1976
0.000216
0.000262
29, 12
28, 2
29,12
30 p.m.
20 p.m.
35 p.m.
Alcohol
Alcohol
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
0.000237
0.000227
0.000227
21, 2
22, 2
22, 2
50 p.m.
45 p.m.
50 p.m.
35
35
8
8.27
0.0047
28,
45 p.m.
32
34.56
0.0214
21, 4
50 p.m.
32
34.33
0.0200
29,
50 p.m.
128
129.5
0.0785
21, 4
55 p.m.
128
129.5
0.0559
28,
00 p.m.
512
520.5
0.2399
22, 4
35 p.m.
512
Alcohol
Alcohol
518.9
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
0.2637
0.000264
0.000233
29,
28,
29,
05 p.m.
55 p.m.
15 p.m.
Alcohol
Alcohol
Alcohol
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
0.000232
0.000219
0.000216
21, 4
22, 4
22, 4
00 p.m.
40 p.m.
45 p.m.
Temperature coefficients.
Temperature coefficients.
v_
i ^ +/\ *>^
OCO 4.- OKO
' n
1O tO ^5O
Zo to 00
TT
1 4-^ O
OKO A.-. OCO
c
P. ct.
P*t
" m
lo to ->
/o to oo
8
o.ooos'
30.7
C071. 117111.
0.0012
. ct.
34.9
Con. unit.
P. ct.
Con. unit.
P. ct.
32
0.0019
15.4
0.0046
32.3
32
0.0045
45.5
0.0055
38.2
128
0.0068
19.6
0.0138
33.3
128
0.0053
10.3
0.0212
37.5
512
0.0307
18.6
0.0607
29.9
512
0.0380
26.8
0.0565
31.4
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL.
75
TABLE 23. Molecular conductivities, temperature coefficients, etc., of certain acids Continued.
1,2,4 Dinitrobenzoic acid.
1
, 2, 4 Dihydroxybenzoic acid Continued.
Temperature coefficients.
v m
V c
Me
Time of reading.
8
32
128
Alcohol
Alcohol
8
32
128
Alcohol
Alcohol
8
32
128
Alcohol
Alcohol
8.13
33.62
133.50
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
8.24
33.62
133.50
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
8.24
33.62
133.5
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
16
0.0379
0.0964
0.2556
0.000882
0.000936
25
0.0481
0.0848
0.1670
0.000991
0.000935
35
0.05879
0.10512
0.20043
0.001133
0.00123
Feb. 27, 12 h 00 m.
Mar. 3, 12 h 10 m p.m.
Feb. 27, 12 25 p.m.
27,12 25 p.m.
Mar. 3, 10 35 a.m.
Feb. 27, 12 40 p.m.
27, 2 15 p.m.
Mar. 3, 12 30 p.m.
Feb. 27, 2 25 p.m.
Mar. 3, 10 40 a.m.
Feb. 27, 4 45 p.m.
27, 3 45 p.m.
Mar. 3, 3 45 p.m.
Feb. 27, 3 50 p.m.
Mar. 3, 3 45 p.m.
V m
15 to 25
25 to 35
8
32
128
512
Con. unit.
0.0014
0.004
0.010
0.0445
P.ct.
21.9
26.5
59.1
44.3
Con. unit.
0.0023
0.0054
0.0117
0.0539
P.ct
28.3
28.3
43.4
37.2
Tetrachlorphthalic acid.
V m
y
M
Time of reading.
16
64
256
1024
Alcohol
Alcohol
16
64
256
1024
Alcohol
Alcohol
16
64
256
1024
Alcohol
Alcohol
16.08
64.06
258.9
1027.0
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
16.21
64.06
259.3
1036.0
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
16.21
64.06
260.0
1043.0
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
15
0.0543
0.1011
0.1294
0.3208
0.000543
0.000554
25
0.0639
0.1198
0.1541
0.3860
0.000616
0.000637
35
0.0770
0.1461
0.1893
0.4960
0.000711
0.000742
Mar. 20, Il h 50 m a.m.
20, 12 00 m.
21,12 15 p.m.
21,12 25 p.m.
20,12 05 p.m.
21,12 45 p.m.
20, 12 50 p.m.
20, 1 00 p.m.
21, 2 00 p.m.
21, 2 10 p.m.
20,12 40 p.m.
21, 2 15 p.m.
20, 4 30 p.m.
20, 4 30 p.m.
21, 4 00 p.m.
21, 4 10 p.m.
20, 3 25 p.m.
21, 4 10 p.m.
1, 2, 4 Dihydroxybenzoic add.
V m
V c
Mi
Time of reading.
8
32
128
512
Alcohol
Alcohol
8
32
128
512
Alcohol
Alcohol
8
32
128
512
Alcohol
Alcohol
9.99
33.0
129.1
514.9
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
10.06
33.01
129.3
517.5
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
10.10
33.01
129.6
520.2
Sp. cond.
Sp. cond.
15
0.0080
0.0155
0.0171
. 1008
0.000551
0.000613
25
0.0098
0.0197
0.0272
0.1464
0.000631
0.000682
35
0.0126
0.0254
0.0391
0.2018
0.000735
0.000791
Mar. 24, ll h 00 a.m.
24, 11 05 a.m.
25, 11 45 a.m.
25,11 50 a.m.
24,11 15 a.m.
25,11 55 a.m.
24, 2 30 p.m.
24, 2 35 p.m.
25, 2 35 p.m.
25, 2 40 p.m.
24, 2 40 p.m.
25, 2 50 p.m.
24, 4 20 p.m.
24, 4 25 p.m.
25, 4 15 p.m.
25, 4 20 p.m.
24, 4 35 p.m.
25, 4 25 p.m.
Temperature coefficients.
Vm
15 to 25
25 to 35
16
64
256
1024
Con. unit.
0.0091
0.0187
0.0243
0.0615
P. ct.
16.9
18.5
18.1
19.3
Con. unit.
0.0138
0.0262
0.0342
0.1057
P. ct.
18.9
21.9
22.5
27.6
TABLE 24. Changes in concentration.
Malonic acid.
Normality.
Time.
Observed.
Calcu-
lated.
De-
crease.
P.ct.
Apr. 16, 12 h 45 m a.m.
0.1232
0.1250
1.44
16, 2 30 p.m.
0.1229
"
1.68
16, 4 00 p.m.
0.1222
"
2.24
16,12 50 p.m.
0.03039
0.03125
2.75
16, 2 30 p.m.
0.03008
"
3.75
16, 4 10 p.m.
0.02966
"
5.09
17,12 00 m.
0.00773
0.007812
1.05
17, 2 30 p.m.
0.00772
"
1.18
17, 4 00 p.m.
0.00771
"
1.31
17, 12 10 p.m.
0.001950
0.001953
0.16
17, 2 40 p.m.
0.001942
"
0.57
17, 4 10 p.m.
0.001930
1.18
76
CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
TABLE 24. Changes in concentration Continued.
o-Chlorobenzoic acid.
p-Ntirobenzoic acid.
Time.
Normality.
Time.
Normality.
Observed.
Calc.
De-
crease.
Observed.
Calc.
De-
crease.
Mar. 18, l^OC^a.m.
18,12 15 p.m.
18, 4 15 p.m.
18, 4 40 p.m.
18,11 00 a.m.
18,11 50 a.m.
18, 3 30 p.m.
18, 4 30 p.m.
19,11 45 a.m.
19,12 30 p.m.
19, 2 30 p.m.
19, 4 00 p.m.
19, 11 35 a.m.
19,12 30 p.m.
19, 2 50 p.m.
19, 4 45 p.m.
0.1228
0.1225
0.1210
0.1208
0.03018
0.02976
0.02914
0.02862
0.00772
0.00771
0.00770
0.00769
0.001946
0.001936
0.001932
0.001923
0.1250
0.03125
0.007812
0.001953
P.ct.
1.76
2.00
3.20
3.36
3.43
4.77
6.75
8.42
1.18
1.30
1.43
1.56
0.36
0.87
1.08
1.54
Apr. 21, 12 h OO m m.
21, 2 30 p.m.
21, 4 45 p.m.
22,12 00 m.
22, 2 30 p.m.
22, 4 45 p.m.
22,12 00 m.
22, 2 30 p.m.
22, 4 30 p.m.
0.03034
0.02976
0.02893
0.007738
0.007734
0.007721
0.001950
0.001932
0.001921
0.03125
0.007812
0.001953
P. ci.
2.91
.77
.43
.95
.00
.17
.16
.08
.64
1,2,4 Dinitrobenzoic acid.
Feb. 27, 12 h 30 m p.m.
27, 2 30 p.m.
27, 4 30 p.m.
27,12 20 p.m.
27, 4 00 p.m.
27, 5 00 p.m.
Mar. 3, 12 35 p.m.
3, 2 30 p.m.
4, 10 00 a.m.
0.1230
0.1213
0.02974
0.00749
0.00764
0.1250
0.03125
0.007812
1.60
2.96
2.96
4.83
4.13
4.13
2.20
p-Chlorobenzoic add.
Mar. 26, 12 h 30 p.m.
26, 2 00 p.m.
26, 4 15 p.m.
26,12 40 p.m.
26, 2 00 p.m.
26, 4 30 p.m.
Apr. 1, 12 30 p.m.
1, 2 20 p.m.
3, 3 30 p.m.
3, 4 10 p.m.
3, 5 00 p.m.
1,12 35 p.m.
1, 3 15 p.m.
3, 12 30 p.m.
3, 3 30 p.m.
3, 4 15 p.m.
0.0996
0.09919
0.0989
0.0297
0.0292
0.0286
0.00771
0.007691
0.00767
0.00766
0.00763
0.001942
0.001923
0.001916
0.001913
0.001903
0.1250
0.03125
0.007812
0.001953
20.32
20.65
20.90
4.96
6.55
8.42
.31
.55
.82
.95
.33
.57
.54
2.05
2.57
This titration was made with the solution after it
had stood in the cell over night.
1,2,4 Dihydroxybenzoic acid.
Mar.24, Il h 15 m a.m.
24,12 30 a.m.
24, 2 30 a.m.
24, 4 30 a.m.
24, 12 25 p.m.
24, 12 45 p.m.
24, 2 30 p.m.
24, 4 30 p.m.
25,12 00 m.
25, 2 30 p.m.
25, 4 15 p.m.
25, 12 10 p.m.
25, 2 40 p.m.
25, 4 30 p.m.
0.10008
0.09940
0.09899
0.09873
0.03034
0.03029
0.03029
0.03013
0.00774
0.00773
0.00771
0.00194
0.00193
0.00192
0.1250
0.03125
0.007812
0.001953
19.94
20.50
20.82
21.02
2.91
3.08
3.08
3.59
0.92
1.03
1.31
> 0.67
1.18
1.69
p-Bromobenzoic acid.
Apr. 28, Il h 30 m a.m.
28, 2 45 p.m.
28, 4 40 p.m.
28,11 40 a.m.
28, 2 50 p.m.
28, 4 50 p.m.
29, 11 00 a.m.
29, 12 15 p.m.
29, 4 00 p.m.
29,11 10 a.m.
29,12 25 p.m.
29, 4 10 p.m.
0.12275
0.12129
0.12088
0.03070
0.03007
0.02914
0.00774
0.00773
0.00771
0.001950
0.001932
0.001927
0.1250
0.03125
0.00781
0.001953
1.80
2.97
3.30
1.76
3.78
6.76
0.89
1.02
1.28
0.16
1.08
1.34
Tetrachlorphthalic acid.
Mar. 20, ll h 50 a.m.
20,12 50 p.m.
20, 3 20 p.m.
20, 4 30 p.m.
20,12 00 m.
20 1 00 p.m.
20, 3 30 p.m.
20, 4 30 p.m.
21, 12 15 p.m.
21, 2 00 p.m.
21, 4 00 p.m.
21 12 25 p.m.
21, 2 10 p.m.
21, 4 10 p.m.
0.06218
0.06168
0.01561
0.00386
0.00385
0.00384
0.000973
0.000965
0.000958
0.0625
0.01566
0.00391
0.000976
0.52
1.32
0.32
1.28
1.53
.79
0.31
.13
.85
o-Nitrobenzoic acid.
Mar. 23, 12 h 15"" p.m.
23, 12 30 p.m.
23, 4 30 p.m.
23, 12 30 p.m.
23, 2 30 p.m.
23, 4 30 p.m.
27, 12 00 m.
27, 2 30 p.m.
27, 4 00 p.m.
27,12 10 p.m.
27, 2 40 p.m.
27, 4 10 p.m.
0.12176
0.12088
0.12088
0.03013
0.02914
0.0286
0.00773
0.00772
0.00771
0.001951
0.001934
0.001928
0.1250
0.03125
0.00781
0.001953
2.60
3.30
3.30
3.52
6.75
8.48
1.03
1.17
1.29
0.10
0.98
1.28
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL. 77
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS.
It will be noted in tables 23 and 24 that 1, 2, 4 dinitrobenzoic acid
shows irregularity in titration values. The conductivity of this acid
was determined before we began to keep the solutions used in titrating
at a constant temperature. With all other acids the results show that
with increase in time a greater amount of esterification has taken place;
that is, the normality of the acid has become less. The amount of
ester formed in a given time depends upon the nature of the acid.
Since each dilution was made up independently of the others, that
is, by direct weight, it is interesting to note that the proportion of
ester formed in the less dilute solutions is much greater than in the more
dilute. Indeed, in some cases there is practically no ester formed in
the y^-g- and -5^ solutions.
As has already been stated, none of the conductivities is greater than
unity; and, consequently, the molecular conductivity of the alcohol for
each dilution is relatively quite large, the correction for this factor being
in some cases as much as 70 per cent of the total conductivity. It can
be seen from the tables that the conductivity of the alcohol alone varies
considerably, usually increasing appreciably with time. Some of the
conductivities of the alcohol increase with rise in temperature, some
actually decrease, while others remain very nearly constant. We can
offer no explanation for this lack of uniform variation, except to call
attention to the several factors which might affect the conductivity
of the pure solvent. One might be the absorption by the alcohol of
traces of various gases or water- vapor from the atmosphere. This,
however, ought to be a negligible factor, since our cells were very nearly
filled and were tightly closed with ground-glass stoppers.
The decomposition effects brought about by the platinum electrodes
may be an important factor. (Compare here the work of Wildermann
and others on this question.) It is evident that the electrodes do have
some effect, since fresh alcohol just taken from the bottle does have a
fairly uniform conductivity. Part of the effect with alcohol which
stood in the cell over night might be due to the solubility of the glass
cells. This, however, is not at all probable, since our cells have been
in constant use in this laboratory for three years, and hard glass is not
very soluble in alcohol.
The conductivities of some of the solutions, and curiously enough of
the more dilute solutions, vary to a much smaller extent, with time,
than does the conductivity of the pure alcohol.
It will be recalled that Wakemann plotted curves of conductivity of
the organic acids against percentage alcohol (see fig. 21), and on extend-
ing the curves in the direction of 100 per cent alcohol they apparently
approached zero conductivity as a limit. As can be seen from our
results, the conductivities do not actually approach zero, but a number
less, and usually very much less than unity.
78
CONDUCTIVITIES OF ORGANIC ACIDS
One of the most interesting facts developed in this work is the very
large percentage temperature coefficients of conductivity of the organic
acids in alcohol. These range for 10 from 15 to 50 per cent.
There is often a rapid increase in the conductivity of the organic acids
with increase in dilution, yet certain of the acids behave in just the
opposite manner e. g., o-chlorbenzoic acid and p-nitrobenzoic acid.
Our results seem to suggest the following possibilities, if we take
into account the work done here on the organic acids in aqueous solu-
tions; that there is much greater alcoholation than hydration, and this
is decreased with rise in temperature. The work already done in this
laboratory renders this highly improbable. The alcoholates may be
more unstable with rise in temperature
than the hydrates, but water seems to
have in general far more power to com-
bine with dissolved substances than
alcohol.
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.13
x.0.12
1 OLII
'H o.io
T5
0.09
u 0.08
1 -0-07
I 0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.0
/
I
//
//
///
1
1
II
'
I/
II
I/
I/
1
j
^
j
^
^^
3 1 Z 3
Log volume
FIG. 25. Malonic acid.
Log
FIG. 26. p-Chlorobenzoic acid.
If dissociation in alcoholic solutions increases with rise in tempera-
ture, it might account for the large temperature coefficients of conduc-
tivity in such solutions ; but this again seems highly improbable. The
greater expansion of the alcohol with rise in temperature would allow a
freer movement of the ions, and this doubtless is of some significance.
A method for determining the dissociation of the organic acids in
alcohol (somewhat similar to that used with aqueous solutions) will,
it is hoped, be worked out in the investigation of this subject which is
to follow this preliminary one. It will involve the study in alcohol of
IN ETHYL ALCOHOL.
79
0.25
0.20
0.15
the conductivity of some salts of the acids, as well as of hydrochloric
acid and the chlorides corresponding to these salts.
The increase in conductivity with increase in volume is shown
graphically in figures 25 and 26. The increase in conductivity with
rise in temperature can be seen from figs. 27 and 28. In the latter case
the curves have very much the appearance of those in aqueous solu-
tions. This suggests that perhaps the increase in molecular conduc-
tivity in alcohol with rise in temperature is a parabolic function, as
in aqueous solutions, and that the Euler equation, n v = fj,Q+at bP,
applies to both.
x
0.15
15 25"
Temperature
FIG. 27. Malonic acid.
5 15 25
Temperature
FIG. 28. p-Chlorobenzoic acid.
This will be tested in the later work by determining the conduc-
tivities of some of the acids at temperatures other than the three
already named, and comparing the results obtained. The most striking
feature of the conductivities of the same acids in water is their very
small value. When we consider the relative powers of alcohol and
water to dissociate salts, the above fact does not at present seem to
admit of any very satisfactory explanation. Alcohol has from one-
fourth to one-fifth the dissociating power of water, as shown by their
dissociation of salts. With the organic acids the conductivities in
alcohol are often several hundred times smaller than in water. It is
hoped that the further work which is now in progress in this laboratory
on this problem may throw some light on this relation.
CHAPTER IV.
THE CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS OF POTASSIUM
IODIDE AND SODIUM IODIDE IN MIXTURES OF ETHYL
ALCOHOL AND WATER.
BY E. P. WIGHTMAN, P. B. DAVIS, AND A. HOLMES.
A brief review of the conductivity and viscosity work in non-aqueous
and mixed solvents, during the past twelve years, is contained in the
last chapter of this monograph. 1 All discussion of this work can,
therefore, be omitted here.
EXPERIMENTAL.
PURE ANHYDROUS ALCOHOL.
Pure anhydrous alcohol was obtained in the following manner : The
ordinaiy 95 per cent ethyl alcohol was heated for three days with lime
in a copper vessel connected with
a reflux condenser. A cooling coil
in the neck of the vessel brought
about rapid condensation, thus
acting as a safety device, so that
there was no danger in keeping
the alcohol constantly heated
during the day without close at-
tention.
In distilling the alcohol, a block-
tin condenser connected with the
copper vessel by means of a
ground-brass joint (see fig. 29) was
used. In this way the ordinary
cork stopper was avoided, and
the alcohol vapor came in contact
only with a metal surface before being condensed. The distillate was
received into large (glass-stoppered) Jena glass bottles.
Specific-gravity determinations showed this to contain from 0.1 per
cent to 0.07 per cent of water. It was, therefore, heated a second time
for three or four days with fresh lime and then redistilled. The dis-
tillate obtained in this manner had a specific gravity from about 0.78511
to 0.78516, usually nearer the former value, which corresponds to a
percentage of 99.98 per cent alcohol.
SPECIFIC-GRAVITY DETERMINATIONS.
Special care was taken in the determination of densities. Two
pycnometers (fig. 30), very nearly alike, were used in the case of
XJ
FIGS. 29 and 30.
30
80
iSee also Carnegie Inst, Wash. Pubs. Nos. 80 and 180.
SOLUTIONS OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER. 81
pure alcohol. They were similar in shape to those employed in earlier
work, but were nearly twice as large, having a volume capacity
somewhat over 20 c.c., and the capillary was of 0.5 mm. bore. By
using one of these as a tare against the other, effects caused by
changes in atmospheric conditions were avoided. It may be said here
also that in all weighings the load was weighed on each end of the
balance beam, and that the final weight represented the mean value of
the two. For all other specific-gravity determinations smaller pyc-
nometers with capacities of about 10 c.c., were employed, and were
weighed directly, as in the previous case, on each end of the beam.
Corrections were always applied to the apparent weights of the con-
tents of the pycnometers in order to reduce them to the vacuum
standard. For this purpose a record was kept of the height of the
barometer and the temperature of the balance-room at the time of
weighing. The buoyancy correction was afterwards determined by
means of table 22, page 37 of Circular No. 19 of the Bureau of Standards.
The capacities of the pycnometers were found in the usual manner,
with the addition of the corrections just mentioned, at 15, 25, and
35 C. Moreover, the pycnometers were reset and re weighed twice at
each temperature, in order to be sure that the capacities were correct.
MIXED SOLVENTS.
The mixed solvents were made up in percentages by weight of alcohol
and water. These percentages were found from the density tables on
pages 6 and 7 of Circular No. 19 of the Bureau of Standards. The
making of the mixtures of alcohol and water on a weight basis was by a
volume method, according to the following formula:
md'(p-x)
~~xd~ ~ y
m being the number of cubic centimeters of alcohol of density d'; p,
the absolute percentage of alcohol; x, the desired percentage of alcohol
to be obtained; d, the density of the water used; y, the number of
cubic centimeters of water of density d to give the required percentage
of alcohol. The formula in practice was simplified by taking 100 c.c.
of the alcohol and calculating a table, using several temperatures as
ordinarily met with in the laboratory (each degree from 20 to 25).
The above formula is derived in the following manner:
Let k = the absolute weight of the alcohol taken; then k = md'p',
where p' is the fraction of alcohol in the absolute alcohol taken.
- (100 a;) = weight of water to be added to make x per cent alcohol;
whence
-(WQ-x)=md'(l-p'
X
82 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
where md' (1 p'} is the amount of water in the alcohol and yd the
amount of water to be added to make the amount - (100 x).
Substituting for k, md'p', the expression becomes
md'p'(WQ-x) ,,,. , , rod'(100p'-oO
-t '- r - ~- -=y
If p' is in percentage this becomes
md'(px) _
xd =y
In this connection a question arose as to whether or not the volume
method of making up the solvent was experimentally accurate. On
the face of it the gravimetric method appears to be a safer one, but it
is also much longer and more tedious. A test was therefore made of
both methods. The calculated amounts of water and alcohol, that is,
the apparent weights of the two necessary to give a 50 per cent mixture
by weight (in vacuo), were weighed into a glass-stoppered flask and
thoroughly mixed. A density determination of the mixture was made
at 25 and found to be 0.909826, or 50.01 per cent alcohol.
In like manner a mixture was made up by volume, using the quan-
tities of alcohol and water calculated from the above formula necessary
to make a 50 per cent mixture by weight ; the specific gravity in this
case being 0.90980, corresponding to 50.02 per cent alcohol.
DISSOLVED SALTS.
Sodium iodide and potassium iodide were used in this investigation.
They were obtained from Kahlbaum and were extra pure material.
In fact, it was not even necessary for us to recrystallize them. We
analyzed them, ground them fine, and placed them in a desiccator to
dry them thoroughly before weighing.
Potassium iodide is not very soluble in pure alcohol. It was with
great difficulty that we were able to make a N/8 solution of it in the 95
per cent alcohol.
PIPETTES.
25 c.c., 50 c.c., 100 c.c., 150 c.c., and 200 c.c. pipettes, carefully
calibrated by weighing the water they would deliver, were employed,
together with a 10 c.c. graduated pipette, for making up the mixed
solvents.
CONDUCTIVITY CELLS.
The conductivity cells were of the same type as those used here
for such work. The general method of determining conductivity
previously described 1 was also employed. Since a number of changes
in the temperature regulation, which will be spoken of later, were made
at the beginning of this work, and since these changes necessitated
rewiring of the system for the determining of conductivity, we tested
1 Amer. Chem. Journ., 46, 56 (1911).
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER. 83
this system very thoroughly to be sure that all external resistance in
the circuit was negligible, or, when it was not, we determined its exact
magnitude in order to make the proper corrections.
The system of wiring was a double one, so that by means of a
double-throw, double-blade switch, both a and b in the formula for
calculating conductivity
va
> = K Wb
could be read directly on the bridge. If two standard resistance boxes
are connected one to each side of the bridge, and plugs representing
equal resistances are removed from both boxes, then the reading of the
wire will be 500 mm., or exactly its middle-point; provided, of course,
that there is no appreciable resistance in the circuit itself (if there is it
must be evenly balanced). Such was the case with our equipment.
Therefore, there were no corrections of this kind to be made to a or b
in the conductivity determinations.
But this double system also serves another purpose. When the con-
ductivity of a solution is being measured, if both a and b are read on the
bridge wire for the same resistance supposing that all other conditions
remain constant then the mean of the two readings will be 500 mm.
If we do not find by actual experiment that our mean value is 500 mm.,
we may be sure that at least one of the other conditions, such as, for
example, temperature, is varying and needs attention.
It was very difficult in some of the measurements to obtain distinct
minima. The distances covered on the wire on either side of the
minimum point in such instances, were so great before finding corre-
sponding sounds on the two sides that the minimum point itself could
be only approximated. We endeavored to overcome this difficulty by
connecting a condenser in parallel with the rheostat. In determining
the conductivities of the alcohol and alcohol-water solutions, it was
practically useless; the fact is, the condenser actually made the read-
ings in some cases harder to obtain. However, in determining the
cell constants of those cells which required low resistances, the bridge
readings were made much sharper over a shorter distance, and the
minimum very much more distinct by the use of the condenser. We
did not arrive at any general conclusion concerning its use.
TEMPERATURE REGULATORS.
A number of different types of thermo-regulators have been used in
this laboratory from time to time; of the earlier forms it is not necessary
to speak. The regulators used during the last two or three years have
had the general form of that shown in figure 31, and were filled with
mercury.
At the beginning of this investigation we devised a regulator (fig. 32)
in which only the trap bulbs and capillary contained mercury, the series
84
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
3 /b'
of tubes (we used only two, figure 32) being filled with toluene, which
has about 6 times the cofficient of expansion of mercury. Instead of
using a 0.75 mm. capillary, into which a platinum wire connecting with
the regulating circuit was introduced, as in the old mercury regulator,
a capillary tubing of 2 mm. internal bore was employed, and the con-
tact was made by means of a steel wire of about 1.5 mm. diameter and
rounded at the end. The regulator worked with a fairly high degree
of accuracy, having a total variation of only 0.01 at 25 and lower
temperatures; and for a time it worked fairly well at 35, but it did not
prove to be satisfactory for any length of time at the latter temperature.
One difficulty was that the mercury at the surface of the glass sooner
or later became covered with toluene, and this began to creep out,
especially when the regulator was
not kept constantly at the desired
temperature, but was allowed to
cool down over night.
This question in the meantime
suggested itself : Why is it not pos-
sible to have two or more long
tubes of thin glass containing mer-
cury instead of toluene, and in order
to avoid too great a weight, to have
these tubes of narrow bore? Thus,
we would have a greatly increased
surface of mercury, in comparison
with the old form of regulator, and
therefore a greater expansion. (See
figs. 33 and 34.) Such a form was . .
tried with great success.
The supply of heat to the ther-
mostat was controlled by a gas-
regulator consisting of a 150-ohm relay, connected electrically with the
thermo-regulator and having an arrangement attached directly to the
armature, for cutting off the gas.
CORRECTIONS FOR EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION.
When the conductivities of electrolytes in water as a solvent are
determined at the temperatures at which we worked that is, 15,
25, and 35 when the solutions are made up at 20, the change in
volume caused by the expansion or contraction of the solvent and
solutions between 20 and these temperatures is so small that the
volume correction can be neglected. With alcohol and mixtures of
alcohol and water, however, this is not the case. The expansion here
is very appreciable, and there are, in consequence, changes in the
normality of the solutions for which corrections should be made.
FIGS. 31, 32, 33, and 34.
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER. 85
The proper corrections have been applied to the data in the following
tables. The difference between the density at 20 and at the other
temperature in question was determined. This difference represents
the decrease or increase in volume per cubic centimeter of the solution.
Subtracting the decrease below 20 from 1.0 and adding it to 1.0 above
20, gives the coefficient of contraction or expansion respectively.
Since at 15 the volumes of the solutions become smaller, there is a
decrease also in the molecular conductivities. At 25 and 35 the
expansion, bringing about an increased volume normality, results in a
positive correction to the conductivity.
VISCOSITIES.
The viscosity apparatus used in this investigation was essentially
the same as that described by Davis and Jones 1 in their work on glycerol.
The viscosimeters were of the general type therein described, the capil-
lary tubes having a diameter of about 0.5 mm. Some improvements
were made in connection with the constant-pressure apparatus for
elevating the liquid to the upper mark on the capillary limb of the
viscosimeter, and special precautions were taken to dry the air thor-
oughly by passing it through a long drying-tube filled with calcium
chloride. By means of dust-traps filled with cotton, clogging of the
capillary was effectively prevented.
The desk supporting the viscosimeter stand was not connected
with the supports for the motor and stirrers. This was to avoid the
vibration due to the motor, and was secured by attaching the motor
support directly to the walls of the building. To reduce the vibra-
tions still further, the stand holding the viscosimeter rested on several
layers of felt.
The stand itself consisted of a heavy tripodal base, with a three-
quarter-inch bronze standard, to which a heavy horizontal arm was
attached by means of a set-screw. The viscosimeters were fastened to
the arm by means of a spring clamp, the tension of which was adjusted
by a thumb-screw. The stand was carefully leveled by means of
leveling screws, at right angles to the line of sight in reading the visco-
simeter. Leveling in the other direction was accomplished by sighting
along the vertical arm of the viscosimeter to a plumb-line suspended
before the glass window in the bath.
Temperature regulation in the viscosity work was essentially the
same as that in the conductivity. By means of the mercury regulator
(fig. 34) already described, the temperature was kept constant for any
desired length of time to within 0.01 at 15 and 35, and to within
0.005 at 25.
JZeit. phys. Chem., 81, 68 (1912).
86
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
TABLE 25. Viscosity and fluidity of potassium iodide in alcohol-water mixtures.
Temp.
Molecular
concentra-
tion.
100 per cent.
95 per cent.
90 per cent.
V
*>
1
p
n
= -
1
The percentage temperature coefficients of fluidity are derived in the
same manner as those of conductivity.
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER.
87
TABLE 26. Tern
sium
emperature coefficients of fluidity of polos-
iodide in alcohol-water mixtures.
Per cent
alcohol.
15 to 25
25 to 35
N/8KI
Solvent.
N/8KI
Solvent.
100....
95
0.0237
0.0226
0.0213
0.0217
90....
0.0257
0.0275
0.0249
0.0259
80....
0.0194
0.0309
0.0338
0.0277
70....
0.0358
0.0374
0.0334
0.0341
60....
0.0386
0.0401
0.0351
0.0349
50....
0.0425
0.0455
0.0368
0.0395
40....
0.0358
0.0468
0.0476
0.0401
30....
0.0467
0.0501
0.0392
0.0324
20....
0.0422
0.0437
0.0361
0.0382
10....
0.0349
0.0359
0.0295
0.0304
5....
0.0306
0.0314
0.0265
0.0267
TABLE 27. Viscosity and fluidity of sodium iodide in alcohol-water mixtures.
Temp.
Molecular
concentra-
tion:
100 per cent.
95 per cent.
90 per cent.
n
n
15
25
35
/N/8
\Solvent . . .
/N/8
\Solvent...
/N/8
(Solvent...
0.03309
0.03333
0.02308
0.02315
0.01676
0.01662
30.22
30.00
43.34
43.20
59.67
60.17
0.03372
0.03421
0.02302
0.02318
0.01649
0.01643
29.65
29.23
43.44
43.15
60.66
60.87
0.03145
0.03165
0.02130
0.02112
0.01521
0.01494
31.80
31.60
46.95
47.35
65.75
66.97
Temp.
Molecular
concentra-
tion.
20 per cent.
10 per cent.
5 per cent.
i\
v
n
V
r>
V
15
25
35
/N/8
\Solvent . . .
/N/8
\Solvent . . .
/N/8
[Solvent . . .
0.02492
0.02551
0.01722
0.01766
0.01259
0.01296
40.13
39.20
58.09
56.67
79.50
77.19
0.01739
0.01752
0.01288
0.01288
0.00987
0.00982
57.57
57.09
77.69
77.69
101.3
101.8
0.01406
0.01410
0.01073
0.01072
0.00849
0.00847
71.16
90.92
93.20
93.28
117.8
118.1
88
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
TABLE 28. Conductivity of potassium iodide in mixtures of ethyl alcohol and water.
Per
F = N/8at20
Per
F=N/128at20.
cent
alco-
15
25
35
alco-
15
25
35
hol.
t)
MB
r
MB
V
MB
V
M
V
MB
V
MB
0.00
8.000
120.7
8.000
144.50
4.98
127.88
90.09
128.26
113.37
128.56
138.29
4.98
7.993
83.25
8.010
104.06
8.035 126.30
10.02
127.85
75.72
128.28
97.43
128.64
121.46
9.55
7.990
70.87
8.011
90.44
8.039 111.64
20.00
127.74
54.231 128.39
73.18
128.93
94.69
20.00
7.984
49.67
8.018
66.46
8.058 85.07
21.75
127.71
51.061 128.41
69.59
128.99
90.38
30.06
7.976
38.39
8.025
52.78
8.086
69.15
30.06
127.61
41.70
128.50
57.50
129.25
76.17
40.23
7.971
32.34
8.030
44.49
8.091
58.44
40.23
127.53
35.72
128.58
49.98
129.46
66.58
50.61
7.966
30.28
8.032
41.07
8.099
53.34
50.26
127.49
32.80
128.61
45.15
129.56
59.60
60.70
7.966
26.49
8.034
35.15
8.101
45.00
60.34 127.48
30.74
128.63
41.39
129.62
53.88
71.09
7.960
24.27
8.034
31.46
8.101
39.54
70.42
127.46
29.85
128.63
39.17
129.66
49.52
80.95
7.964
23.22
8.035
29.27
8.104
36.02
80.51
127.45
29.60
128.65
36.92
129.67
46.20
92.63
7.962
19.76
8.035
23.77
8.104
28.28
90.67
127.45
29.05
128.66
35.88
129.69
43.48
96.09
7.966
18.63
8.035
22.22
8.108
26.12
95.77
127.45
28.59
128.65
34.61
129.67
40.37
TABLE 29. Conductivity of sodium iodide in mixtures of ethyl alcohol and water.
Per
F=N/8at20
Per
F=N/32at20
cent
alco-
15
25
35
cent
alco-
15
25
35
V
Mr
V
MB ! "
MB
" MB
V
MB
V
MB
00
8 000
81 00
8000
100.4
8.000
121 6
00
i
32 00
107 40
32 00
130 60
4.98
7.993
65.66
8.010
83.03
8.035
101.78
4.98
31.97
i 69.11
32.04
87.75
32.14
108.70
10.02
7.991
55.09
8.011
71.28
8.040
89.06
10.02
31.96
1 58.20
32.04
75.61
32.16
95.08
20.00
7.984
39.62
8.018
53.62
8.058
69.47
20.00
31.93
41.90
32.07
57.12
32.23
74.50
21.75
7.982 i 37.48
8.019
51.10
8.062
66.54
30.06
31.90
31.98
32.10
44.58
32.31
60.32
30.06
7.976 ] 30.82
8.025
42.89
8.078
56.69
40.23
31.88
28.56
32.12
40.09
32.36
53.54
40.23
7.971 i 26.91
8.030
37.49
8.091
49.69
50.26
31.87
25.33
32.13
35.04
32.39
47.10
50.26
7.968 24.66
8.032
33.73
8.097
44.21
60.34
31.87
25.23
32.13
33.97
32.40
44.18
60.34
7.967 | 23.09
8.033
30.99 8.101
39.97
70.42
31.86
23.83
32.14
31.36
32.42
40.25
70.42
7.966 22.00
8.034
28.70
8.104
36.41
80.51
31.86
24.15
32.14
30.71
32.42
38.31
80.51
7.966 20.78
8.035
26.39 8.105
32.64
90.67
31.86
23.47
32.14
28.69
32.42
34.90
90.67
7.966 19.42
8.035
23.80; 8.106
28.63
95.77
31.86
22.12
32.14
26.85
32.42
32.04
95.77
7.966
18.18
8.034
21.88
8.105
25.95
99.98
7.966
16.51
8.034
9.471
8.103
22.68
Per
F=N/128at20
Per
F=N/1024at20
cent
alco-
15
25
35
cent
alco-
15
25
35
V
MB
V
MB
F
MB
. I
V
MB
V
MB
0.00
128.00
112.5
128.00
112.50
128.00
136.80
0.00
1024.0
1024.0
116.40
1024.0
141.6
4.96
127.88
73.31
128.26
92.96
128.56
114.81
5.06
1023.0
77.89
1025.3
98.87
1028.5
121.9
10.00
127.85
61.26
128.28
79.83
128.64
100.39
10.02
1022.8
65.56
1025.4
85.44
1029.1
107.6
20.00
127.74
44.13
128.39
60.18
128.93
78.35
20.00
1021.9
46.84
1026.3
63.86
1031.5
83.7
29.98
127.61
32.83
128.50 46.09
129.25
61.83
30.06
1020.9
34.81
1027.2 48.97
1034.0
65.8
39.98
127.53
29.67
128.58 i 41.81
129.46
56.02
40.23
1020.3
31.72
1027.8
44.62
1035.6
60.2
50.02
127.49
26.79
128.61 34.98
129.56
48.04
60.34
1019.8
30.38
1028.2
40.69
1036.9
53.5
63.23
127.48
24.82
128.631 36.07
129.62
43.42
70.42
1019.7
28.51
1028.4 37.83
1037.3
48.7
70.06
127.46
25.99
128.63 34.42
129.66
44.32
80.51
1019.6
30.42
1028.4
39.02
1037.4
49.5
80.52
127.45
27.07
128.65 i 34.76
129.67
43.71
90.67
1019.6
31.83
1028.5
38.39
1037.5
48.7
90.61
127.45
27.27
128.66 33.79
129.69
41.28
95.77
1019.6
30.70
1028.4
36.46
1037.4
45.8
95.00
127.45
26.10
128.65
31.88
129.67
38.40
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER. 89
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS.
VISCOSITY AND FLUIDITY.
Viscosity data have been obtained in the various mixtures of alcohol
and water that have been studied, both for the solvents and the N/8
solutions of potassium and sodium iodides. The values for the more
dilute solutions approach those for the solvents too closely to be accu-
rately differentiated from them. The results are given in tabular form,
together with a representative table of temperature coefficients for the
range of temperature over which the work was carried out, i. e., 15,
25, and 35.
Table 25 gives the values found for potassium iodide, and table 27
similar values for sodium iodide. It will be seen that the effect of these
salts on the viscosity of alcohol-water mixtures is comparatively small
for the N/8 solutions. In no instance does the decrease in fluidity,
which corresponds to an increase in viscosity, exceed a few per cent,
and in certain of the mixtures containing the smaller percentage of
alcohol a marked increase in the fluidity is to be noted. This will be
discussed when each salt is taken up separately.
In all mixtures of alcohol and water from 100 per cent alcohol to that
containing 60 per cent alcohol, both potassium and sodium iodides show
a marked increase in the viscosity of the solvents at the temperatures
studied. Beyond this point the effect on the viscosity is somewhat
different for each salt.
From the 60 per cent solvent down to the per cent, i. e., pure water,
potassium iodide lowers the viscosity of the solvent to an appreciable
extent at 15. At 25 no negative viscosity effect is to be noted until the
30 per cent mixture is reached. At this point a corresponding decrease
was also noted at 35. Potassium iodide, therefore, may be said to
increase the viscosity of all mixtures of alcohol and water from 100 per
cent alcohol to 30 per cent alcohol at 25 and 35, and to decrease the
viscosity of all the other mixtures up to and including pure water.
The shifting of the point at which the fluidity curve for the salt
crosses that for the solvent is to be accounted for by the change in
association of the solvent with rise in temperature. Since a rise in
temperature causes a breaking down of the molecular aggregates of the
solvent giving ultimate particles of smaller volumes, it follows that
this would tend to shift the transition-point towards one extreme or the
other. Since potassium iodide increases the viscosity of mixtures con-
taining a high percentage of alcohol, the shifting takes place towards
the water end of the curve.
The points discussed above are shown graphically by figures 35 and
36, which represent the curves for solvent and solutions at 15 and 25.
Table 26 contains the temperature coefficients of fluidity for the solvent
and N/8 potassium iodide, for all percentages of alcohol and water
studied. They are seen to decrease in value with rise in temperature
90
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
and have a maximum at about the 30 per cent alcohol mixture. The
values for the solvent are slightly higher than those for the solution.
Sodium iodide, like potassium iodide, increases the viscosity of mix-
tures containing a higher percentage of alcohol. At 15 the transition-
point occurs in the neighborhood of the 50 per cent mixture. At 25
and 35 somewhat irregular results were noted. The salt increases
the viscosity of all the solvents through the 50 per cent mixture.
Beyond that point an apparently periodic effect occurs, negative vis-
cosity appearing only in the 40 per cent and 20 per cent mixtures.
Reference to the tables will show that the difference between solution
100
95
90
75
70
65
a
E 60
55
50
45
40
75
70
65
60
55
g
1"
45
'0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage alcohol . x=solvent. o=solution.
FIG. 35. Fluidity of KI at 15 and 25.
25
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage alcohol. x=solvent. o=solution.
FIG. 36. Fluidity of Nal at 15.
and solvent is very small for the N/8 concentration. In the 10 per
cent and 5 per cent mixtures the salt exerts scarcely any effect on the
solvent at 25 and 35.
From this it would seem that the molecular volume of the dissolved
sodium iodide is smaller than either the associated alcohol or water com-
plexes; but in mixtures of these two solvents in which the association
becomes smaller, a negative viscosity effect is apparent as soon as the
dissolved particles are larger than the ultimate particles of the solvent.
From the data at hand the change in association appears to take place
more largely in the case of the water than of the alcohol. Similar
reasoning holds for potassium iodide.
The explanation of the phenomenon of negative viscosity as first
offered by Veazey 1 , has been further elaborated by subsequent in-
1 Amer. Chem. Journ., 37, 405 (1907)
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER.
91
vestigators 1 and it is unnecessary to discuss it here in detail. It is
sufficient to state that the facts brought out in this investigation are
entirely in harmony with the theories established by previous workers.
CONDUCTIVITY.
The conductivity data given above were plotted in the form of curves;
ordinates representing conductivities and abscissas the percentages by
weight of alcohol. The conductivity of each concentration of the
solutions at the three temperatures were plotted on one curve sheet
in order the better to compare them. Before plotting these curves we
attempted to plot one which would give us the conductivity values
(plotting conductivity against normality) for the ordinary normalities
j.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100.
Percentage alcohol
FIG. 37. N/8-KI.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percentage alcohol
FIG. 38. N/8-NaI.
N/8, N/32, etc., instead of for those given above. However, we found
this to be impracticable, both as to the drawing of the curves and also
as to the results we would have obtained; since, with reference to the
latter, the slight change in conductivity that would result would not
be sufficient to alter, to any appreciable extent, the character of the
curves obtained by using the above values, although these values are
obviously not strictly comparable with one another.
It will be seen from figures 37 and 38, which show the curves for
N/8 potassiu n and sodium iodides at 15, 25, and 35, that there is a
continual decrease in the conductivity of both salts in passing from
the pure water to the pure alcohol.
iCarnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 80.
92
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
The values for pure-water solutions were taken from the work of
West and Jones, 1 except those for 15. For this temperature they
were calculated by means of the equations
for sodium iodide, and
for potassium iodide. These equations apply only to the N/8 solutions,
every other dilution requiring a different equation. The accuracy with
which West and Jones's values fit the curve is worth noting.
4.96%
Temperature
FIG. 39. N/8 Nal.
25
Temperature
FIG. 40. N/8 Nal.
The decrease in conductivity just mentioned is very rapid in the
water end of the curve up to the 30 per cent alcohol, and from there on
it is much more gradual. We may conclude from this, either that
the first addition of alcohol to water has a much more marked effect
on the association of the water than the addition of a little water to the
alcohol has on the association of the alcohol, or that comparatively
small quantities of alcohol increase the viscosity of water much more
markedly than is the case when small quantities of water are added to
alcohol; or, again, that there is a sudden change in the hydration of the
dissolved substance caused by the addition of the alcohol, whereas
water has a far smaller effect on the alcoholation; or, finally, that
perhaps all or some of these factors combine to produce the effect.
Let us analyze them.
'Amer. Chem. Journ., 34, 377 and 384 (1905).
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER.
93
The third conclusion may be disposed of first as of little value, since
it will be remembered that salts of the alkali metals are very little
hydrated or alcoholated.
We have just seen, from a study of the viscosity data, that there is a
marked negative viscosity, i. e., positive fluidity, at the water end of
the fluidity curves. On the other hand, there is a steadily increasing
viscosity at the alcohol end. Moreover, the transition-point from
positive to negative viscosity was shown to be nearer the pure water
than the pure alcohol. To recapitulate, it was concluded from these
120
no
100
90
I 80
| 70
60
60
40
30
120
IK
100
90
80
~ 70
I 60
50
40
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percentage alcohol
FIG. 41. N/128 Nal.
80 90 100
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage alcohol
Fio. 42. N/32 Nal.
results that the change in association brought about by the mixing of
the two solvents appeared to take place more largely in the case of the
water than of the alcohol.
Both our first and second conclusions, with regard to the phenomenon
observed in the case of conductivity, appear, then, to be in perfect
harmony with those concerning the association and the viscosity. As
to the final conclusion, it obviously follows as a matter of course from
what has preceded, since the association and viscosity are so closely
related.
The decrease in the conductivity as a whole is more rapid for the
potassium iodide than for the sodium iodide. This is what might have
been expected from a study of the viscosity data, which, in turn, are
affected by the relative ionic volumes of potassium and sodium. The
former, having the larger volume, would have a greater negative effect
94
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
than the sodium on the solvent, this being the same in both cases.
Although the ionic velocity of the potassium is the greater, this greater
volume tends to slow it down more as the alcohol is approached.
There is an unusual downward deflection in the curves beyond
the 80 per cent alcohol, increasing in steepness as the 100 per cent
alcohol is approached, which at first puzzled us every much. The
asymmetry, that is, the unsymmetrical appearance of our conductivity
curves, had already been noted. Then the question arose, what would
be the appearance of a symmetrical curve if the viscosity and con-
ductivity at either end were symmetrical with respect to the 50 per cent
mixture? What kind of a curve would we have? The answer to this
question is given in figure 42, from which it can be seen, on comparison
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage alcohol
FIG. 43. N/128 Nal.
10 20 30 40 60 60 70 80 90
Percentage alcohol
FIG. 44. N/1024 Nal.
100
with the curves for the actual conductivity, that in the latter the point
of symmetry has been shifted from the 50 per cent mixture to the 80
per cent, and that the end on the alcohol side is not really at the 100
per cent alcohol, but is imaginary, since the line at the 100 per cent
point must be extended to make the curve symmetrical. To be more
exact, we see here shifting similar to that noted above in the case of the
transition-point in the fluidity ; only, this happens at every temperature
instead of with rise in temperature.
As the temperature rises the conductivity curves tend to become
more and more nearly a linear function, that is, those for 35 have
much less bend to them than those for 15. A probable explanation
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER.
95
of this is that the fluidities of a series of such mixtures of alcohol and
water tend also to become more nearly a linear function with rise in
temperature.
In figure 39 we have plotted the conductivities of N/8 solution of
sodium iodide in the various solvents with respect to temperature,
making ordinates the conductivity and abscissas the temperatures.
From this we observe that the
temperature coefficients increase
slightly with rise in temperature,
with the exception of the 95 per
cent mixture and the pure alco-
hol. Further, the increase be-
comes smaller as we approach the
pure alcohol. The temperature
coefficients themselves also be-
come smaller as the percentage
of alcohol becomes greater.
The slight increase in the tern-
perature coefficients in the water
end is doubtless due to the same
cause which produces an increase
in the temperature coefficients in
pure water, namely, a breaking
down of the hydrated ions with
rise in temperature. As was said
before, the salts of the alkali metal
are only very slightly hydrated;
therefore, the small increase in
temperature coefficients.
Further, it is probable that since, with decrease in the amount of
water, the increase in coefficients becomes less until there is none in the
alcohol, the alcohol does not form alcoholates with these salts.
Thus far we have discussed only the relations which exist between
the conductivities of the N/8 solutions. Reference to the curves for
the other dilutions, figures 41, 42, 43, 44, and 45, will, however, show
that the conclusions already arrived at also hold for them.
One point which should be noted is that in the case of sodium iodide
there are distinct, though slight minima in the curves for N/128 and
N/1024 solutions, occurring at about the 70 per cent alcohol. This
phenomenon is not at all an unusual one, since practically everyone
who has determined the conductivities of other substances in alcohol-
water mixtures has found similar more or less pronounced minima.
Almost all previous work was in dilute solutions.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage alcohol
FIG. 45.
96 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
SUMMARY.
It has been our endeavor throughout this investigation to improve
the viscosity and conductivity methods wherever possible, in order to
eliminate the grosser errors which ordinarily creep in, for example:
temperature regulation; a more exact determination of the external
resistance in the circuit; a change from suction to pressure as a means
of raising the liquid in the viscosimeters, etc.
Instead of making up our solvents by the volume standard, as pre-
vious workers have done, we used the weight standard. An equation,
md'(p x)
xd
was deduced and employed for determining the amounts by volume of
the water necessary to add to 100 c.c., or even multiples of this quan-
tity of alcohol, in order to make the required mixtures by weight.
Viscosity and conductivity determinations were made with several
dilutions of potassium and sodium iodides, in a series of mixtures of
alcohol and water; and curves representing fluidity as ordinates and
percentages of alcohol as abscissas were drawn, as well as curves for
conductivity as ordinates plotted both against mixtures of solvent and
against temperatures as abscissas.
CONCLUSIONS.
We arrived at the following conclusions :
1. The effect of sodium and potassium iodides on the viscosity of
ethyl alcohol-water mixtures is comparatively small for N/8 solutions.
2. There is a marked increase in the viscosity of the solvents caused
by these salts in passing from the 100 per cent alcohol to the 60 per
cent alcohol.
3. The shifting of the point at which the fluidity curve for the salt
crosses that for the solvent with rise in temperature, is to be accounted
for by the change in association of the solvent with rise in temperature.
4. This change in association is greater for the water than for the
alcohol.
5. The facts brought out in connection with the viscosity work were
in harmony with those discovered by previous workers, and therefore
'can be explained in the same way.
6. There is a continual decrease in the conductivity of N/8 sodium
and potassium iodides in passing from pure water to pure alcohol. It
is much more rapid in the large percentages of water than in the large
percentages of alcohol.
7. This may be explained as due to the fact that the association of
alcohol is changed to a much smaller extent by adding small quantities
of water, than is water when to it small quantities of alcohol are added.
Moreover, since association and viscosity are so closely related, we
OF SALTS IN ETHYL ALCOHOL AND WATER. 97
also conclude that the same reasoning may be applied to the latter; in
other words, there is a greater change in the viscosity of the water than
of the alcohol.
8. The decrease in the conductivity of potassium iodide with the in-
crease in the percentage of alcohol, is more rapid than the decrease for
sodium iodide, due no doubt to the greater atomic volume of the former.
9. Hydration has practically no effect on the conductivity at any one
temperature. With rise in temperature, however, the breaking down
of the slightly hydrated ions causes a small increase in the temperature
coefficients in most of the solutions containing water. In alcohol the
temperature coefficients are a linear function, and therefore there is no
alcoholation.
10. As the temperature rises the curves tend to become more and
more nearly a linear function. We attribute this to the fact that as
the temperature rises the fluidity curves also tend to become more
nearly linear.
CHAPTER V.
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS OF RUBIDIUM SALTS
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER.
BY P. B. DAVIS AND H. HUGHES.
The work done in the Chemical Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins
University during the past dozen years, on the relations between the
viscosities of solvents and solutions of certain salts in these solvents, was
referred to at the beginning of the last chapter. That which is closely
related to the contents of this chapter is the work of Jones and Veazey,
Jones and Schmidt, Jones and Guy, and especially that of Jones and
Davis. 1 The last named extended the work in glycerol as a solvent,
studying especially the conductivities and viscosities of glycerol solu-
tions of ammonium and rubidium salts, as has already been pointed out.
AJ1 previous work in the laboratory with acetone as a solvent shows
that it has exceptional properties. Measurements of both conduc-
tivity and fluidity have usually given results that are abnormal in
terms of other solvents: for this reason it was chosen as a solvent in
this investigation, in the hope that the property possessed by rubidium
salts of forming solutions having a lower viscosity than that of the
solvent might throw some additional light upon the phenomena pre-
sented by solution. Only mixtures of acetone and water have been
used, because in pure acetone the rubidium salts studied are not suf-
ficiently soluble to affect the fluidity to a measurable extent.
EXPERIMENTAL.
CONDUCTIVITY APPARATUS.
Bridge. The conductivity measurements were made by means of a
slide-wire bridge about 5 meters long, the balance being detected by a
telephone receiver. The bridge and rheostat were made and stand-
ardized by Leeds and Northrup Co., of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
and the rheostat was compared with one recently standardized by the
United States Bureau of Standards.
A double system of wiring was used between the rheostat, slide wire,
and cells, so that by means of a double-arm double-throw switch the
arms of the bridge could be interchanged. In this way the resistance
a of the first portion of the slide wire was read and then b = 1000 a
for comparison. The circuit was opened and closed by an ordinary
telegraph key, whose resistance was made of negligible value by con-
necting the frame to the lever by a short spring of large copper wire.
The wire used throughout was number 12 gage, and the cells con-
taining the solutions were connected with the rest of the bridge by a
large flexible cable of copper having a negligible resistance. All con-
nections were soldered, and the various portions of the apparatus were
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pubs. Nos. 80 and 180.
98
SOLUTIONS IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER. 99
tested for any appreciable resistance. The two halves of the double
system for reading a and b were carefully compared, and b was found not
to differ from 1 ,000 a by any appreciable quantity , except for resistances
smaller than any used in this investigation that is, below 10 ohms.
Cells. The conductivity cells were of three forms. For the most
concentrated solutions two U cells with adjustable electrodes were
employed, having constants of about 15,000 and 30,000. The most
dilute solutions and the solvents were measured in cells with cylindrical
electrodes of the type described by Jones and Schmidt, 1 and by Jones
and Kreider, 2 and with constants ranging from 2.9 to 4.3. The inter-
mediate dilutions, that is, from N/10 to N/400 solutions, were measured
in cells of the plate type described by Jones and Bingham. 3
Constant-temperature Baths. The constant-temperature baths used in
both parts of this investigation were of the same general type employed
for such work in this laboratory, and consisted essentially of round,
galvanized-iron tubs of about 20 liters capacity, covered with non-
conducting material. For the viscosity work the baths were equipped
with large glass windows in the upper walls, 180 apart.
A more efficient form of stirrer provided with double journals and
6-bladed propellers was employed, and the brackets supporting these
were attached directly to the walls of the building. The stirrers were
driven by a round belt, at about 200 revolutions per minute, by a -gV
horsepower water-cooled hot-air engine. These improvements lessened
materially the vibrations due to side-thrust from the propellers, and
increased the up-and-down stirring of the water in the bath, at the same
time giving less circular motion.
By means of the pressure from a 2.5 meter stand-pipe, water could be
kept flowing through special cooling coils of copper placed in the
bottoms of the baths. This facilitated temperature regulation at or
below room temperature. An auxiliary coil immersed in an ice-bath
was also introduced into the cooling system by means of brass unions,
whenever the average temperature of the tap-water approached too
closely to the lowest temperature at which the work was attempted.
Temperature Regulation. Temperature regulation of a high degree of
accuracy was obtained by equipping all baths with an approved form
of electrically operated gas-valve, consisting essentially of a sensitive
150-ohm relay, to the armature of which was attached a device for
cutting down the flow of gas whenever the relay was set in action by
the thermo-regulator in the bath. The relays were connected in paral-
lel on a 2.5-volt circuit from accumulators, and were operated by an
improved form of mercury thermo-regulator of the general type de-
scribed by Morse, but having 2 to 4 reservoir tubes of special hydro-
meter tubing, with walls about 0.25 mm. thick. A maximum surface
of mercury was thus secured, in keeping with the stability of the instru-
ment. A more detailed description of the above forms is to be found
'Amer. Chem. Journ., 42, 39 (1909). *Ibid., 45, 282 (1911). /Kd., 34, 481 (1905)
100 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
in our work with Wightman on conductivity and viscosity in alcohol-
water mixtures. 1
With this improved form of apparatus we have maintained a con-
stant temperature over any desired length of time to within 0.01, for
temperatures from 15 to 40, and at 25 with moderate precautions
variations in temperature not more than 0.005 resulted. An ad-
ditional advantage of the type of thermo-regulators described above,
over the more complicated toluol-mercury and other froms, lies in its
simplicity and in the fact that it may be readily constructed by anyone
possessing moderate skill in glass manipulation. The lengths of the
reservoir tubes need be limited only by the depth of the baths used.
In this work tubes 25 cm. long and 7 cm. interior diameter were found
to be most satisfactory. The thermometers used were of the Beckman
type graduated to 0.02 ; and these were compared at frequent intervals
with a thermometer which had been standardized within the year by
the United States Bureau of Standards.
VISCOSITY APPARATUS.
The viscosity apparatus used throughout this investigation was the
same essentially as that described in our work with glycerol. 2 Special
precautions were taken to eliminate, as far as possible, several annoy-
ing sources of error. Vibrations of the instruments due to external
causes were guarded against by making use of a special support for
the viscosimeters, consisting of a heavy tripodal leveling base resting on
several layers of thick piano felt, and a large bronze standard to which
a horizontal arm was rigidly attached by a collar and set-screw. The
viscosimeters were supported in the bath against a cork-covered brass
plate at the extremity of this arm, by means of a spring clamp, the ten-
sion of which was adjusted to different instruments by a thumb-screw.
Further precautions were taken against vibrations by removing the
engine and stirrer brackets from direct contact with the desk supporting
the baths and viscosimeter stand.
It was necessary also to guard against dust particles, which would
tend to clog the capillary of the viscosimeter. To this end special
precautions were necessary, both in making up solutions and in using
them in the viscosimeters. It was found necessary to use silk instead
of linen in polishing all weighing vessels, and to wash out all flasks
with dust-free water and alcohol, and then dry them by a blast of
air filtered through cotton wool. The viscosimeters were thoroughly
cleansed with chromic acid before each procedure, washed as above,
and dried by aspirating hot, dust-free air through them. For this
purpose the air was drawn through glass wool, over calcium chloride in
a long drying-tower, then through cotton wool, and finally through a
short iron tube heated in an asbestos chamber by means of a flat
burner. A final filtration through cotton took place before the air
^our. Chim. Phys. (1913). Chapter IV, this monograph.
2 Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 180 (1913).
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER. 101
was drawn into the viscosimeter. The instruments were thus thor-
oughly and quickly dried, and examination with a hand-lens showed
complete absence of dust particles in the capillary or bulb tubes.
When it was necessary to take a series of readings on a particular
viscosimeter, this was equipped with a special head designed to exclude
moisture and dust particles from contact with the liquid in the instru-
ment. The liquid was then raised to the upper mark on the small
bulb by means of a constant air-pressure apparatus, using the same
stand-pipe as the cooling system. Air entering the viscosimeter from
the pressure vessel was first carefully dried and freed from dust by
the use of fused calcium chloride and cotton wool, and by means of
stop-cocks all external air was excluded during the actual time of flow of
the liquid through the capillary.
By observing the precautions noted above we have succeeded in
obtaining from 3 to 5 consecutive readings on any particular viscosim-
eter, all agreeing to within the limits of error of the stop-watch used,
which was a fine split-second Swiss instrument, reading to 0.2 second
and adjusted with great accuracy. This watch had the additional
advantage of running continuously, whether the hands were released or
not, and gave much better results than the intermittent form heretofore
used. Frequent comparisons were made with standard chronometers,
and no errors of sufficient magnitude to affect the accuracy of the work
were detected.
Specific-gravity determinations were made with a modified form of
the Ostwald pycnometer, which is so well known that it does not
require further description.
All flasks were carefully calibrated to hold aliquot parts of the true
liter at 20, and solutions were brought to within 0.1 of this temperature
before being diluted to the mark.
SOLVENTS.
Water. The water was purified by the method of Jones and Mackay 1
as modified by Schmidt^ and has a mean specific conductivity of
1.5XlO- 6 at25.
Acetone. Kahlbaum's so-called pure acetone was allowed to stand
for several days over calcium chloride, and distilled two or three times.
No difficulty was experienced in obtaining a product of approximately
the same conductivity as the water used in this work. Solutions were
made up as quickly as possible after distilling the acetone, which was
always kept in a dark place.
Mixtures of Acetone and Water. The mixtures used as solvents were
made by diluting a given volume of acetone to a definite volume with
water at 20. For convenience, the number of cubic centimeters of
acetone diluted to 100 c.c. was indicated as the "percentage" of acetone
in the solvent. A very considerable contraction takes place when ace-
tone and water are mixed, so that the figures used to designate the
1 Amer. Chem. Journ., 17, 83 (1895).
102 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
mixture are, of course, not true percentages either by weight or volume.
The true percentage, however, is of no consequence so long as the
mixture is thus denned. Actually, the mixture of 500 c.c. acetone
diluted to 1 liter at 20 contains about 42 per cent by weight of
acetone, and the mixture of 250 c.c. of acetone diluted to 1 liter con-
tains approximately 20 per cent by weight of acetone.
SOLUTIONS.
Solutions of one-tenth normal and all greater concentrations were
made by dissolving the requisite weight of salt. The N/50 and N/100
solutions were made from the N/10 by dilution; and the N/200 and
N/400, respectively, were made from these. The N/800 and N/1600
concentrations were prepared in the same manner from the N/200 and
N/400. The last two concentrations were thus made in three dilutions
from the N/10 concentration. Upon the basis of a probable percentage
deviation of 0.10 per cent in the original weight of salt, and in the
measurement of the solvent in the flask, and of 0.40 per cent in the
measurements from the burettes, the probable errors in the value of V
at these greatest dilutions is about 0.70 per cent. The probable error
in the other dilutions is, of course, much less than this, being within 0.14
per cent in the case of the N/10 and all greater concentrations.
All solutions were made up at 20. No correction for changed
normality at higher temperatures had been applied to the values
obtained for molecular conductivity. Rise in temperature, of course,
diminishes the normality of a solution. This effect is accompanied by
an increase in molecular conductivity which is complex. While this
increase in conductivity due to temperature, is of the same order of
magnitude as that produced by the same lowering of normality caused
by diluting with more of the solvent, the two effects bear no known
relation to each other.
SALTS.
The rubidium salts used in this work were Kahlbaum's purest pro-
ducts. They were recrystallized two or three times from conductivity
water, precipitated and washed with alcohol, and dried at 120 to 135
according to the nature of the salt. The iodide was pure white after
drying, and the more concentrated solutions were only slightly colored
after standing several days.
PROCEDURE.
CONDUCTIVITY MEASUREMENTS.
The values of the molecular conductivity // are computed from the
relation /*, = K =-, where v is the number of liters of solvent containing
a gram-molecular weight of the salt; w, the resistance in ohms; a/6,
the ratio from the Wheatstone bridge; and K, the cell constant.
The cell constants were determined with solutions of potassium
chloride of N/50, N/500, and N/200 concentrations. The value taken
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER. 103
for the molecular conductivity of the N/50 solution was that given by
Ostwald, namely, 129.7 reciprocal Siemens units at 25. Three resist-
ances were used in the measurement of each solution.
It should be pointed out that the fact that w is measured in ohms is
not incongruous with the use of reciprocal Siemens units in the result,
the factor 1/1.063 being included in the cell constants obtained. To
convert the results given in the tables into reciprocal ohms, it is only
necessary to multiply by 1.063.
The calculation of data was facilitated by the use of tables of values
of T X . By use of notation by powers of 10, twenty values of were
sufficient for the preparation of these tables, which were readily com-
puted with a calculating machine. Not only does the use of such tables
save considerable time in computation, but in their preparation the
chances of mistakes are eliminated by methods which do not obtain
when the values are independently computed. The tables used in
this work gave all Wheatstone-bridge ratios from 400/600 to 600/400
to millimeters with interpolations to tenths of millimeters.
The greatest error in the measurements of the components K, v, a, 6,
of the molecular conductivity ju, occurs in the determination of the cell
constants of the plate cells. This is subject to considerable variation,
and it was necessary to make frequent determinations of these values.
Under average conditions the precision of n, is from 0.5 to 1.0 per cent.
Temperature Coefficients. The temperature coefficient in conduc-
tivity units is the increase in conductivity for each degree rise in temp-
erature; that is,
Temp.coeff. =^=^
the temperatures compared always differing from each other by 10.
The temperature coefficients in per cent is the above quantity divided
by the conductivity at the lower temperature and multiplied by 100,
e. 0.,
U 35 M25 100
Percentage coefficient = ^ ---
Viscosity measurements were calculated from the formula = -.
7/0 S 0*0
in which rj is the viscosity coefficient for the liquid in question, T/ O the
absolute viscosity of water, s the specific gravity of the liquid at the
given temperature, t the time of flow of the same, s and t the density
and time of flow of water at the same temperature.
Fluidity was calculated from the formula < = - where represents
"n
the fluidity.
104
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
TABLE 30. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of rubidium salts in
acetone-water mixtures at 15, 25, 35, and 45.
RUBIDIUM CHLORIDE.
Mixture.
Molecular conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Conductivity units.
Per cent.
V
15
25
35
45
15 to
25
25 to
35
35 to
45
15 to
25
25 to
35
35 to
45
In 75 per cent
acetone
In 62.5 per cent
acetone
In 50 per cent
acetone
4
10
200
2
10
200
2
10
200
2
10
200
2
10
[ 200
f 2
I 200
25.5
32.5
50.8
30.9
39.0
52.5
39.1
45.6
56.7
49.3
54.5
63.0
59.0
62.8
73.6
74.3
90.5
30.4
43.1
63.1
37.7
47.9
66.5
48.8
59.5
72.5
61.5
82.6
73.9
78.0
94.1
91.2
115.1
35.5
50.1
76.0
44.8
57.2
82.8
59.0
70.9
90.3
74.8
84.4
100.1
89.3
93.3
116.1
109.4
138.4
40.9
88.0
52.8
66.7
97.4
81 '.8
108.6
88.9
101.5
121.3
106.0
110.0
140.0
127.9
164.9
0.490
1.063
1.229
0.688
0.891
1.20
0.975
1.388
1.58
1.225
1.473
1.952
1.495
1.520
2.041
1.692
2.46
0.502
0.696
1.30
0.710
0.922
.632
.020
.144
.78
.325
1.526
.759
.541
.532
2.201
1.819
2.33
0.548
i.20
0.798
0.955
1.46
.077
.090
.83
.419
.708
.12
.668
.674
2.39
1.850
2.65
1.92
3.27
2.42
2.23
2.28
2.37
2.49
3.04
2.79
2.49
2.71
3.10
2.54
2.42
2.77
2.28
2.72
1.65
1.62
2.06
1.88
1.93
2.46
2.09
1.93
2.45
2.16
2.21
2.13
2.08
1.97
2.34
2.00
2.02
1.55
1.58
1.78
1.67
1.77
1.82
1.54
2.03
1.90
2.03
2.12
1.87
1.80
2.06
1.69
1.91
In 37.5 per cent
acetone
In 25 per cent
In 12.5 per cent
acetone
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE.
2
28.2
33.5
38.8
43.9
0.529
0.53
0.52
0.188
.58
1.34
4
32.5
39.1
45.7
52.6
0.655
0.66
0.68
2.02
.69
1.49
10
39.1
47.6
55.9
64.7
0.845
0.83
0.88
2.16
.74
1.57
In 75 per cent
50
48.7
59.6
71.0
82.8
1.09
.14
1.18
2.25
.91
1.66
aC6trOD.6
100
52.3
64.2
76.8
89.5
.19
.26
.27
2.28
.96
1.65
200
55.1
68.1
81.6
95.1
.30
.35
.35
2.36
.98
1.66
400
58.4
71.8
85.8
100.9
.34
.40
.51
2.30
.95
1.76
800
61.2
75.7
90.8
106.7
.45
.51
.59
2.37
.99
1.76
.1600
65.9
81.3
97.8
114.9
.54
.65
.71
2.34
.03
1.75
In 62.5 per cent
2
36.2
44.2
52.7
61.5
.80
.84
.88
2.18
.90
1.67
acetone
10
43.5
53.9
63 8
74.2
.04
.99
.04
2.39
.84
1.63
200
56.5
72.7
87.1
103.9
.62
.44
.68
2.87
.98
1.93
1
40.9
50.5
60.6
71.3
.956
.01
.07
2.34
2.01
1.76
2
43.3
54.2
65.7
77.8
.09
.15
.21
2.51
2.12
1.82
4
45.8
57.9
70.6
84.7
.21
.27
.41
2.64
2.19
2.00
10
47.8
59.8
72.5
84.8
.20
.27
.23
2.51
2.13
1.70
In 50 per cent
50
54.6
69.8
86.3
103.0
.52
.65
.67
2.78
2.37
1.94
acetone
100
56.6
72.4
89.9
107.9
.58
.75
.80
2.80
2.42
2.00
200
57.5
73.8
91.5
110.0
.63
.77
.85
2.84
2.40
2.02
400
59.3
76.1
94.5
113.3
.68
.84
.88
2.83
2.42
1.99
800
60.7
78.1
97.4
117.2
.74
.93
.98
2.87
2.47
2.03
1600
61.6
79.2
98.5
118.4
.76
.93
.99
2.86
2.44
2.02
In 37.5 per cent
2
51.1
64.2
78.4
93.4
.31
.42
.50
2.55
2.22
1.92
acetone
10
54.3
67.7
82.2
96.5
.35
.55
.43
2.48
2.28
1.74
200
64.8
83.8
104.0
125.0
1.91
2.02
2.10
2.94
2.41
2.02
f 2
61.2
76.6
92.6
109.7
In 25 per cent
1 10
63.7
79.2
95.4
111.6
acetone
1 50
9J\J
73.3
93.8
115.4
138.4
200
75.7
96.9
119.7
143.6
In 12.5 per cent
v. ^ rVVF
f 2
75.6
93.1
111.5
130.3
acetone
1 10
81.7
102.3
123.5
146.0
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER.
105
TABLE 30. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of rubidium salts in
acetone-water mixtures at 15, 25, 35, and 46 -Continued.
RUBIDIUM IODIDE..
Temperature coefficients.
TV/T 11 rl *" 'f*
Mixture.
Conductivity units.
Per cent.
V
15
25
35
45
15 to
25
25 to
35
35 to
45
15 to
25
25 to
35
35 to
45
1
36.2
43.0
50.6
57.6
0.68
0.75
0.71
1.88
.75
1.40
4/3
37.1
44.1
52.0
59.8
0.70
0.69
0.78
1.89
.56
.50
2
38.8
46.4
53.8
61.5
0.75
0.74
0.73
1.93
.63
1.36
4
42.7
51.3
59.7
68.5
0.87
0.84
0.88
2.03
.67
.47
In 75 per cent
10
58.0
68.2
78.7
0.93
1.05
.61
.53
acetone
50
67.9
80.8
93.7
.30
1.29
.92
.60
100
58.7
71.8
85.7
99.5
!38
.39
1.38
2.37
.93
.61
200
60.4
74.3
87.6
102.8
.39
.33
1.52
2.31
.79
.78
400
62.5
76.3
91.2
107.3
.38
.49
1.61
2.21
.95
.77
800
64.2
78.5
94.1
119.6
.43
.55
1.55
2.23
.95
.67
1600
65.2
80.1
95.3
111.4
.49
.52
1.61
2.29
.90
.69
In 62.5 per cent
( 2
42.8
53.0
63.3
74.2
.01
.13
1.09
2.37
2.13
1.73
acetone
10
48.6
60.7
73.3
86.7
.23
.26
1.34
2.52
2.08
.82
[ 200
57.5
72.7
89.1
106.5
.52
.65
1.74
2.64
2.27
.95
1
46.5
57.4
68.6
81.0
.087
.124
1.236
2.34
1.96
1.80
4/3
46.7
58.1
69.8
82.9
.940
.169
1.314
2.02
2.01
.89
2
47.2
58.8
71.0
83.9
.16
.22
1.29
2.45
2.08
.82
4
49.0
62.0
76.0
91.8
.301
.40
1.575
2.68
2.26
2.07
In 50 per cent
10
61.5
65.3
80.3
95.2
.379
.502
1.49
2.68
2.33
1.86
acetone
50
55.5
71.0
87.7
105.7
.55
.67
1.80
2.79
2.35
2.05
100
56.6
72.2
108.8
.56
.75
1.91
2.76
2.42
2.13
200
58.3
74.9
92.8
112.3
.56
.79
1.95
2.68
2.39
2.10
400
59.0
75.8
94.0
114.1
.68
.82
2.01
2.85
2.40
2.14
800
60.2
77.7
95.9
116.5
.75
.82
2.06
2.91
2.35
2.15
1600
62.5
78.8
96.9
120.5
.63
.81
2.36
2.61
2.30
2.28
In 37.5 per cent
{ 2
53.8
67.9
82.8
98.7
.41
.49
.59
2.62
2.19
1.92
acetone
10
56.2
72.7
89.4
107.1
.66
.66
.77
2.95
2.28
1 99
[ 200
63.8
82.0
101.7
123.1
.82
.97
.13
2.86
2.41
2.09
{ 1
62.7
77.3
92.5
108.5
.45
.52
.61
2.32
1.97
1.74
4/3
63.0
77.9
94.1
110.6
.49
.62
.65
2.36
2.09
1.75
2
63.9
78.9
95.7
113.8
.59
.68
.81
2.52
2.12
1.89
4
63.0
80.4
98.7
117.3
1.65
.84
.85
2.58
2.28
1.88
In 25 per cent
10
65.1
83.2
101.8
121.6
1.81
.86
.98
2.78
2.24
1.94
acetone
50
70.8
90.2
111.0
133.4
1.94
2.08
2.24
2.74
2.31
2.01
100
72.0
91.7
113.1
135.9
1.97
2.14
2.28
2.74
2.34
2.02
200
74.2
94.5
117.1
139.9
2.03
2.26
2.28
2.74
2.39
1.95
400
74.0
94.1
116.8
140.1
2.01
2.27
2.33
2.72
2.42
2.00
800
75.1
95.6
118.5
145.2
2.05
2.29
2.67
2.73
2.40
2.25
1600
75.8
96.4
118.3
141.5
2.06
2.19
2.32
2.72
2.28
1.96
In 12.5 per cent
f 2
76.2
94.2
112.5
131.6
1.79
1.83
1.92
2.35
1.94
1.71
acetone
\ 10
80.6
100.4
121.4
144.0
1.98
2.09
2.26
2.43
2.01
1.86
I
[ 200
89.9
113.4
137.7
163.1
2.35
2.43
2.54
2.62
2.14
1.84
106
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
TABLE 30. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of rubidium salts in
acetone-water mixtures at 15, 25, 85, and 45 Continued.
RUBIDIUM NITRATE.
Temperature coefficients.
Mixture.
Molecular conductivities.
Conductivity units.
Per cent.
V
15
25
35
45
15 to
25
25 to
35
35 to
45
15 to
25
25 to
35
35 to
45
4
32.8
39.4
46.4
53.7
0.658
0.694
0.74
2.01
.77
1.60
10
40.0
48.3
56.9
65.7
0.827
0.86
0.88
2.07
.78
1.55
In 75 per cent
50
51.3
62.5
74.1
86.2
1.12
1.16
1.21
2.19
.96
1.64
acetone
100
55.4
67.4
80.7
93.9
1.20
1.33
1.32
2.17
.98
.64
200
58.8
71.6
85.3
99.5
1.28
1.37
1.42
2.18
.92
.67
400
61.1
74.4
89.0
104.3
1.33
1.46
1.53
2.18
.96
.72
800
63.7
79.0
94.2
110.6
1.43
1.52
1.64
2.21
.93
.74
1600
67.5
82.2
98.1
115.3
1.47
1.59
1.72
2.18
.94
.75
In 62.5 per cent
f 4
38.8
48.0
57.8
68.1
0.926
0.98
1.03
2.39
2.04
.78
acetone
10
44.3
55.2
66.4
78.2
1.09
1.13
1.18
2.47
2.05
.77
I 200
57.1
71.9
87.0
103.8
1.48
1.51
1.68
2.59
2.09
.93
2
39.9
50.2
60.9
72.4
1.03
1.07
1.15
2.59
2.13
.89
4
43.7
55.2
67.3
80.7
1.16
1.21
1.34
2.65
2.19
.99
10
48.2
61.5
74.8
89.3
1.33
.33
1.45
2.76
2.16
.94
In 50 per cent
50
54.8
69.8
85.8
103.1
1.50
.60
1.73
2.74
2.29
2.02
acetone
100
56.7
72.4
89.1
107.3
1.57
.67
1.82
2.77
2.31
2.04
200
58.0
75.6
91.9
110.2
1.76
.63
1.83
3.02
2.16
1.99
400
59.3
75.5
93.1
112.3
1.62
.76
1.92
2.73
2.33
2.06
800
60.2
77.1
95.0
115.3
1.69
.79
2.03
2.81
2.33
2.14
1600
59.2
76.2
94.0
113.9
1.70
.78
1.99
2.88
2.34
2.12
In 37.5 per cent
\ 2
45.7
57.6
70.5
84.7
1.19
.29
1.42
2.61
2.24
2.00
acetone
10
54 4
69.4
84.7
101.4
1.49
.53
1.67
2.75
2.21
1.98
[ 200
63.9
81.7
101.2
122.0
1.78
.95
2.08
2.78
2.39
2.05
2
54.4
68.3
82.9
98.2
1.40
.45
1.53
2.57
2.13
1.85
4
58.2
73.5
89.6
106.9
1.43
.61
1.73
2.47
2.19
1.93
10
61.0
75.1
91.5
110.3
1.41
.64
1.88
2.31
2.19
2.06
In 25 per cent
50
69.2
87.8
107.7
128.8
1.86
1.99
2.11
2.69
2.27
1.96
acetone
100
71.2
90.6
111.4
133.5
1.94
2.08
2.21
2.78
2.30
1.98
200
73.3
93.5
114.9
137.5
2.02
2.12
2.28
2.76
2.27
1.99
400
73.0
92.9
114.9
137.6
1.99
2.20
2.27
2.73
2.34
1.98
800
79.4
100.4
123.6
147.7
2.10
2.32
2.41
2.65
2.31
1.95
1600
73.3
92.8
114.2
136.6
1.95
2.14
2.24
2.66
2.31
1.96
In 12.5 per cent
' 2
65.1
80.6
96.8
113.7
1.55
1.62
1.69
2.38
2.00
1.75
acetone
10
74.1
91.7
106.9
123.9
1.76
1.51
1.71
2.37
1.65
1.60
200
87.0
108.8
131.7
156.4
2.18
2.29
2.47
2.50
2.10
1.88
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER.
107
i I
ooo ooo ooo odd
'OOO OOO OOO OOO
000 000 000 OOO
CN CO p O5 O* 10 CO C CN t - -: r i
''
gs
e<3 IO CC O CO CO i-
CO CD CO 10 "5
ooo o o o
iO-<*O t^t^t^- OiOOOO
Jo op ppp 999 999
odd odd odd odd
332i 8 2 1 gS| 82.
00002 O O DO O O CO OOI
108
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
pop
odd
I ;g.
i b- IN O C H ^H
000 OOO O -0000
000 000 OOOOOO
O O O 000
b- b- CO
d d d
o
OJ 1C 05 o o
b. >C IN rH 1C -H ,
^000002 ddi
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER.
109
dddddd odd odddo'd odd d -odd odd
OOOOOO 000 OOOOOO
oo o o o o ooo
oooooo ooo oooooo
NIC t^ OS i O IN iO O^OO
do dddddd odd
t>. O CO Tf i-l
co i> co OJ co
'NC5t> CDOrH
MO 1 * p os p ^_ os os p
% si oo CD 2 ?i si oj
3 O O CO !N
dddddd ddo oooooo ooo dg,dooo ooo
dddddd
p po ooo
do do" do
222
ooo
odd
o So ooo ooo
CD CD Tt< 00 *< "5
35 O5 --H ^ CD t^
rn in CO IN (N IN
O O O O O
dddddd
ppp ppppop ppp p 9 . . . 9
odd dddddd odd o'ddddd
. ..
odd
O5O51>OS ^i (
ppppop
d d d d d d
^O O- ^ 10 >O
000 00 -O O -OO 000 000 000
^IIN o oo o o o * oo
X O X 01 t^ O
2> e3 M x
tOX^Jt
?
n
*
*7
<*>
15
f 2
10
0.01204
83.07
0.01556
.01547
.01516
64.26
64.64
65.99
). 01778
.01774
.01774
56.25
56.37
56.37
0.017SO
.01823
.01829
56.19
54.86
54.69
[Solv.
.01115
89.76
25
f 2
10
[Solv.
00963
103.9
.01200
.01186
.01158
83.31
84.29
86.37
.01353
.01331
.01329
73.91
75.14
75.14
.01331
.01354
.01361
75.13
73.87
73.46
00886
112.8
35
f 2
10
[Solv.
00794
66721
125.0
138.6
.00951
.00936
.00910
105.2
106.8
109.9
.01061
.01039
.01026
94.25
96.26
96.49
.01028
.01038
.01050
97.24
96.34
95.93
45
f 2
10
[Solv.
.00667
149.9
.00774
.00757
.00731
129.2
132.1
136.8
.00853
.00819
.00818
117.2
122.1
122.2
.00818
.00823
.00827
122.2
121.5
120.9
.00599
166.9
Temp.
V
25 per cent.
12.5 per cent.
per cent.
n
n
*
i)
15
f 2
10
[Solv.
0.01630
.01658
61.33
60.31
59.05
0.01367
.01415
.01430
73.14
70.65
69.91
25
f 2
10
[Solv.
.01247
.01227
.01266
80.17
81.52
79.01
.01005
.01086
.01086
93.87
92.09
92.05
0.00872
.00880
.00891
114.7
113.6
112.2
35
f 2
10
[Solv.
.00978
.00950
.00975
102.3
105.2
102.6
.00847
.00852
.00855
118.1
117.4
116.9
.00718
.00717
.00720
139.4
139.4
138.9
45
f 2
1 10
[Solv.
.00790
.00756
.00779
126.6
132.1
128.3
.00695
.00698
.00698
143.9
143.3
143.3
.00608
.00596
.00597
164 3
167.7
167.5
DISCUSSION.
A parallel investigation of the viscosities and fluidities of solutions
of the several salts studied has been carried on in connection with the
conductivity side of the problem.
We have measured the viscosities of the tenth and half normal
solutions of rubidium chloride, bromide, iodide, and nitrate, in all the
various mixtures of acetone and water used as solvents; also the vis-
cosities of the quarter, three-quarters, and whenever possible the normal
solutions of the same salts in the mixtures designated as 75 per cent,
50 per cent, and 25 per cent acetone with water. It was not possible
to obtain data on solutions of these salts in pure acetone, on account
112 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
of their difficult solubility in this solvent. However, their great solu-
bility in water made it possible to obtain quite concentrated solutions
in the majority of the mixed solvents, even in that containing 90 per
cent acetone. Only in one instance, that of N/2 rubidium chloride
in 75 per cent acetone, was a solution obtained which was non-miscible
with the solvent at 20, and at 15 a homogeneous solution was obtained.
Table 31 contains the values found.
From our previous work on these salts in glycerol and water, we
should naturally expect to find instances of negative viscosity in acetone-
water mixtures. However, the peculiarity of acetone as a solvent at
once makes itself evident. Except in those mixtures containing the
larger percentage of water, it will be noted that these salts increase the
viscosity of the various solvents. Jones and Veazey had already noted
this phenomenon in the case of potassium sulphocyanate, but the nega-
tive effect produced by rubidium salts is so great in other solvents that
the two classes of salts can hardly be regarded as comparable.
A glance at the tables will show that rubidium iodide and nitrate, the
two salts found to give the greatest viscosity lowering in glycerol- water
and their mixtures, produce a marked increase at all dilutions in the
viscosity of the solvents up to the 50 per cent acetone mixture. Beyond
this point the fluidity curve (fig. 46) for the salts crosses that of the
solvent, and a negative viscosity effect becomes apparent in the mix-
tures containing the lower percentages of acetone. The 50 per cent
mixture is apparently very close to the transition-point, since certain
dilutions apparently increase the viscosity of the solvent, while others
lower it. It would seem that in mixtures from 100 per cent to 50 per
cent acetone the molecular volume of the dissolved salt is smaller than
the molecular aggregates of the solvents; and in the other mixtures,
larger. The salts lower the viscosity of pure water, because according
to Jones and Veazey's theory their molecular volumes are greater than
the complexes of the solvent. On the addition of acetone having appar-
ently much larger molecular complexes, this negative viscosity effect
becomes less and less with increasing percentage of acetone, until we
reach a mixture in which the two factors balance one another. This
point is in the neighborhood of the 50 per cent mixture. By still
further increasing the percentage of acetone, the aggregates of the
solvent exceed the molecules and ions of the solute in size and a
positive viscosity effect results.
Associated with each table of viscosities and fluidities is a corre-
sponding table of temperature coefficients. Their relations to those of
conductivity are taken up in the discussion of that phase of the work,
which immediately follows.
It was found by Jones and Veazey 1 that the curves expressing the
fluidity of varying mixtures of acetone and water are almost exactly
. Chem. Journ., 37, 405 (1907).
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER.
113
parallel to those for the conductivity of potassium sulphocyanate in
solution in the same mixtures. The fluidity curve for acetone has a
minimum between 37.5 per cent and 50 per cent; and the fluidity for
the rubidium halides and nitrate has its minimum in approximately the
same position (fig. 46). The conductivity curves, however, of the rubi-
dium salts have their minima corresponding to a much greater per-
centage of acetone (fig. 47). As has been shown by previous workers,
this minimum in fluidity occurs at the position where the breaking
down of association of one solvent by the other is greatest. The con-
ductivity depends upon the velocities of the ions and the degree of
dissociation. The dissociation is least when the association of the
solvent is least, and the speed of the ions is least when the fluidity is
greatest. Therefore, if these were the only determining factors, the
conductivity minima always correspond to the fluidity minima.
240
22L)
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
\
\
\
\
\Solv
nt
V
\
\\
Sol
tion\
s.
//
X
s
/
*v^.
-==
2~^
12.5
100 87.5 75 62.5 50 37.5
Percentage acetone
FIG. 46. Fluidity of rubidium bromide,
solution and solvent.
,
/
/
7
,,
"/
/
\
. /
/
^
^
/
/
75 62.5 50 37.5 25 12.5
Percentage acetone
FIG. 47. Conductivity and viscosity of rubid-
ium iodide in acetone-water at 25.
Curve I, ordinates, molecular conductivity.
Curve II, ordinates, fluidity.
Potassium sulphocyanate has a considerable solubility in pure ace-
tone (about 20 grams in 100 grams of acetone at 20), whereas the
rubidium salts studied are only slightly soluble in pure acetone. There-
fore, in the same concentrations, the rubidium salts are nearer satura-
tion than potassium sulphocyanate. The percentage dissociation is,
therefore, lower in the case of rubidium salts than in that of potassium
sulphocyanate. A possible explanation of the shifting of the minimum
in the conductivity of rubidium salts towards the greater proportions of
acetone, is that the great insolubility in acetone might cause the disso-
114
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS
elation to be driven back. This shifting of the minimum by the slight
solubility, however, seems to be clearly manifested only between salts
with great difference in solubility in acetone, as is the case with potas-
sium sulphocyanate and the rubidium halides. Of the four salts, rubi-
dium chloride, iodide, bromide, and nitrate, the solubility in acetone of
only the iodide is accurately known, so that these salts could not be com-
pared with each other for the relation between solubility and minimum
conductivity.
The relative solubilities in water probably do not correspond to the
relative solubilities in acetone. The iodide and the nitrate are respec-
tively the most soluble and the least soluble in water; but the conduc-
tivity minima of these two salts are the farthest from the ordinate,
corresponding to 100 per cent acetone (figs. 48 to 51).
lib
,
7
/
''/
'
&
y
V
/
/ /
2
f
irrz
^-^
/
t
/
2
N
10
/
10
?
2
75 62
.5
37
.5 2
5 U
.5
E
/0
V,
1600
L
//
//
S"
f
//
^
/
/
y
N
50
/
/
/
/
N
10
/
/
1
Percentage acetone
FIG. 48. Conductivity of rubidium
iodide in acetone-water at 25.
75 62.5 50 37.5 25 12.50
Percentage acetone.
FIG. 49. Conductivity of rubidium
bromide in acetone-water at 25.
It is not to be expected that the differences in solubility in water of
the different rubidium salts would show this relation, because in the
dilutions which are sufficiently great to give any minimum at all, these
salts are very far from their saturation in water. In the dilutions
greater than N/800, that is, where the dissociation approaches com-
pleteness, the minima in the conductivity curves are seen to be nearer
those of fluidity (figs. 48 and 51).
A comparison of the percentage coefficients of fluidity given in
tables 34 to 38 with those of conductivity, shows that the two are
nearly equal, which is to be expected in the case of a non-solvated salt.
IN MIXTURES OF ACETONE AND WATER.
115
For the same salt the coefficients of conductivity, while nearly equal,
are somewhat smaller than those of fluidity. As Davis and Jones have
pointed out, this is due to "the decrease in association of the solvent
with rise in temperature, causing a decrease in the ionization of the
solute, and therefore a smaller conductivity."
In most cases the molecular conductivities of N/800 and N/1600 are
practically the same, showing that the dissociation has apparently
become nearly constant. If the conductivity depends only upon the
velocity of the ions and the number of ions present, then, in the case
of a non-hydrated electrolyte, since velocity is proportional to fluidity,
fj.^ in solvent = 102 for rubidium bromide at 25
in "50 per cent" acetone. The molecular conductivity becomes con-
stant at about 80. This indicates either that the equilibrium between
ions and molecules becomes constant at a = 80/102 = 78 per cent
(where a is the percentage dissociation) ; or that the dissociation is
complete at the N/800 dilution, and the molecular conductivity is
decreased by a decreasing velocity of the ions. The first alternative
seems improbable. The second may seem unlikely in view of the fact
that at high concentrations rubidium salts are not appreciably solvated.
This, however, is not evidence that there is no solvation at great dilu-
tion. And this would seem to be the most probable explanation of the
low constant value for /*.
116 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS.
SUMMARY.
The viscosities and conductivities of a number of rubidium salts have
been measured in various mixtures of acetone and water.
Rubidium salts increase the viscosity of all mixtures containing a
larger percentage of acetone.
The curve representing the fluidities of a solution of any of these
salts in the various solvents crosses the curve for the solvents in the
neighborhood of the 50 per cent acetone-water mixture.
Negative viscosity coefficients, wherever found, were much smaller
than corresponding values in water or glycerol.
The temperature coefficients of fluidity of acetone-water mixtures
are very small and decrease with rise in temperature.
The largest temperature coefficients occur in the mixture containing
50 per cent acetone, i. e., the curve representing temperature coeffi-
cients passes through a maximum at that point.
Minima in the conductivity curves for rubidium salts correspond to
a higher percentage of acetone in the solvent mixtures than do those
in the fluidity curves, whereas the two curves are parallel for certain
other salts. A possible explanation based on the difference in solu-
bility is offered.
A comparison of the temperature coefficients of conductivity and
fluidity shows that these are what is to be expected in the case of a
non-solvated salt in a mixture of associated solvents.
A possible indication of solvation of rubidium salts in dilute solutions
is pointed out.
CHAPTER VI.
THE CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF CERTAIN RUBIDIUM AND
AMMONIUM SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES OF GLYCEROL,
ACETONE, AND WATER AT 15, 25, AND 35.
BY P. B. DAVIS AND W. S. PUTNAM.
INTRODUCTION.
The fairly extensive investigations of Jones and his collaborators on
conductivity and viscosity in the field of mixed solvents, have been
brought together and correlated in two elaborate monographs pub-
lished by the Carnegie Institution of Washington. 1
By far the greater part of this previous work has been devoted to
binary mixtures of the various solvents studied, as well as to the pure
solvents themselves. Up to the present, the work has covered very thor-
oughly the determination of the conductivity and viscosity coefficients
of a large number of compounds, both inorganic and organic, in water,
and in acetone, glycerol, and the alcohols, as well as in binary mixtures
of the latter solvents with one another and with water. Thus far, how-
ever, few if any attempts have been made to carry out a systematic
study of the behavior of such compounds in ternary mixtures contain-
ing the above-named solvents. Such, then, has been the object of the
present investigation, which may be taken as the initial step in a series
of similar researches.
Before taking up the discussion of this phase of the subject, a short
review of the various relations and deductions brought out by previous
investigators in the field of mixed solvents, should serve as a fitting
introduction to the present work, by calling to mind the various lines
of evidence bearing on this subject.
However, since we have been concerned more particularly with
glycerol, acetone, and water in this and in previous contributions to the
literature on the subject, the review following will be confined to the
investigations covering these three important solvents. Moreover, the
work in mixed solvents containing the alcohols has recently been care-
fully reviewed in a previous article.
The first important work in mixed solvents contai ning acetone was
that of Jones and Veazey. Prior to their investigations, Bingham and
others had made some preliminary determinations of conductivities
and fluidities in this solvent along with their work in the alcohols.
Thus, Bingham noted the characteristic minima occurring in the con-
ductivity curves for certain salts in acetone-water mixtures, and pointed
out that a connection undoubtedly existed between this and a similar
phenomenon in the fluidity curves for such mixtures.
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pubs. Nos. 80 and 180.
117
118 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
Subsequently, McMaster found these minima to be more pronounced
at lower temperatures, and corroborated the observations of Bingham
regarding the relations between conductivity and fluidity minima in
these curves. He also noted and offered a tentative explanation of
certain maxima in the curves for acetone-alcohol mixtures.
Although Veazey's work has been fully reviewed in a previous
article, it bears directly on the present investigation, since it contains
some of the facts earlier established. In addition to confirming the
above-mentioned deductions of Bingham, McMaster, and others,
Veazey noted and explained the marked increase in viscosity on mixing
acetone, as well as the alcohols, with water. This he showed to be due
to a mutual diminution in the association of the respective solvents, the
resulting mixture having a greater number of ultimate particles and
hence a larger viscosity coefficient than either solvent separately. More-
over, Veazey was the first to offer an entirely satisfactory explanation
of the phenomenon of negative viscosity noted in certain aqueous
solutions by a number of previous investigators, and extended this field
to include mixed solvents. His interpretation of this phenomenon is
now too well known to require more than the mere statement that it is
based on the relations of the molecular volume of the solute to that of
the solvent, negative viscosity occurring only when the former is much
greater than the latter. This relation is, furthermore, borne out by the
position of the cations of the solutes causing negative viscosity at the
maxima of the atomic volume curve of Lothar Meyer.
Jones and Schmidt studied glycerol as a solvent, and carried out
determinations in both the pure and mixed solvents. They found it
well adapted to both conductivity and viscosity work, since, in addi-
tion to possessing a high viscosity coefficient, it proved to be a good dis-
sociant, and showed the largest temperature coefficients of conduc-
tivity and viscosity of any solvent hitherto employed.
Guy and Jones extended greatly the field opened up by Schmidt, and
from a large number of measurements pointed out that molecular con-
ductivities in glycerol are extremely small, but show a regular increase
with dilution and rise in temperature. It was also shown that salts
having the greatest hydrating power in water possess the largest tem-
perature coefficients of conductivity in glycerol. In mixed solvents
Guy and Jones found that conductivities do not follow the law of aver-
ages, but are always smaller, and that the ternary electrolytes produce
a greater increase in the viscosity of the solvent than the binary elec-
trolytes. Isolated instances of negative viscosity were observed both
in glycerol and in certain mixtures of glycerol and water, which led
Davis and Jones to make a closer study of this phenomenon.
Davis and Jones, working from the standpoint of negative viscosity,
made a careful study of the conduct of rubidium and ammonium salts
both in glycerol and in glycerol-water mixtures. They found that
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES. 119
rubidium salts produced a phenomenal lowering of the viscosity of
glycerol, while ammonium salts proved to be more closely allied to
rubidium than to potassium in their effects on a solvent like glycerol.
They also noted minima in certain of the conductivity curves for the
more concentrated solutions studied; the conductivity varying directly
with the fluidity. In addition to this the percentage increase in fluidity
was found to diminish rapidly with rise in temperature and with dilu-
tion, and the curves representing fluidity and conductivity in glycerol-
water mixtures showed marked similarity. No evidence of positive
viscosity of solutions of rubidium salts in glycerol was found, and in
the case of mixed solvents only at comparatively high temperatures.
The study of the behavior of rubidium salts in mixed solvents was
extended by Davis, Hughes, and Jones to acetone-water mixtures. A
marked increase in viscosity was found for all the rubidium salts in the
solvents containing the larger percentage of acetone, a phenomenon
which this electrolyte had exhibited in none of the solvents previously
studied. The curve representing the fluidity of solutions of these salts
in the different mixtures was observed to cross that of the solvents in
the vicinity of the mixture containing 50 per cent acetone. Negative
viscosity coefficients, wherever noted, were much smaller than corre-
sponding values in glycerol-water mixtures. A comparison of the tem-
perature coefficients of fluidity and conductivity showed them to be
very similar, and of the order of magnitude to be expected for a non-
solvated salt in a mixture of associated solvents. In addition, minima
were noted in the conductivity curves for these salts, and were found to
correspond to a higher percentage of acetone in the solvent than in the
case of similar minima in the fluidity curves.
The important observations on solutions in binary mixtures made by
the above-mentioned investigators in this laboratory make it evident
that some lines of evidence are desirable, on the behavior of certain
salts in ternary mixtures containing the three important solvents dis-
cussed, viz, glycerol, acetone, and water. The present investigation,
therefore, has been devoted to a study of the behavior of rubidium and
ammonium salts which exhibit negative viscosity to a high degree in
many pure solvents and their binary mixtures, in a new series of sol-
vents which contain varying proportions of glycerol, acetone, and water.
EXPERIMENTAL.
APPARATUS.
Thermostats. As in previous years, it has been our constant aim to
bring to as near perfection as possible this fundamental part of the
apparatus. With this in view, a new type of thermostat (fig. 52 A)
has been devised suitable both for conductivity and viscosity determi-
nations, or for reaction velocity work; and three such baths have been
recently installed and put into full working order (Plate I). These
thermostats are of about 60 liters capacity and are substantially con-
120 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
structed of copper. Gas is employed as a means of maintaining the
desired temperature, the heat being applied to a heavy iron pipe (fig.
52 A-H) outside the circumference of the bath, and through this pipe
water is kept circulating by the propellers. Thus only a small portion
of the water in the thermostat comes into immediate contact with the
heated surface, being subsequently mixed with the main body of water,
thereby securing much more even distribution of heat.
The improved type of mercury regulator described by Davis and
Hughes was used to operate the relays (fig. 52 c) controlling the gas-
supply to the micro-burners of the thermostats. A new type of toluene
regulator suitable for a wide range of temperature has been constructed
(fig. 52 B). With the above improved apparatus, temperature regu-
lation to within 0.01 was easily maintained over any length of time
throughout the work, and with a reasonable amount of attention regu-
lation to 0.005 was attained. (See fig. 52 for details of the system.)
The hot-air engines formerly used as a source of power for the stirrers
have been discarded in favor of the electric motor, which gives greater
freedom from vibrations and permits the maintainence of constant
temperature in the baths both day and night. Both belt and friction
drive were used to transmit power from motor to stirrers, a 1-12 horse-
power direct-current motor serving to operate all five thermostats.
Conductivity Apparatus. The conductivity apparatus used in this
investigation was identical with that employed for our recent work in
acetone-water mixtures ; the methods of obtaining duplicate readings,
system of wiring, and similar details remaining exactly the same as in
the earlier work. The conductivity cells also were of the type now
generally employed here for such work, and have been fully described
elsewhere. All the instruments used were carefully calibrated at regu-
lar intervals or compared with standards.
Viscosity Apparatus. The usual type of viscosity apparatus as
developed and improved here was used throughout this work. Special
care was exercised both in calibrating all the instruments and in guard-
ing against external jars and vibrations.
Volumetric Apparatus. All flasks were carefully calibrated by
repeated weighings to hold aliquot parts of the true liter at 20; and
solvents and solutions were brought to within 0.1 of this temperature
before being diluted to the calibration mark. All pipettes used in
making up the solvents were standardized to drain a definite amount
of each component at 20, the mean of a number of weighings being
taken as the drainage capacity of the respective instruments.
SOLVENTS.
The glycerol used in these ternary mixtures was Kahlbaum's 1.26,
with a mean specific gravity of 1.257 at 25 and a specific conductivity
of 0.6X10~ 7 at the same temperature.
Enlarged View of New Form of Thermostat. For diagram and detailed description see Fig. 52.
General View of Constant Temperature Apparatus for Viscosity and Conductivity Investigations
showing arrangement, metnods of stirring, heating, regulating, etc.
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
121
FIG 52 -Constant Temperature Apparatus for Conductivity and Viscosity Investigations.
and rougl1
filled with waste; (BE) oil trap; (FF) six-bladed
E - ^inss ss rs?
very'low or high temperatures); coolmg coils; (oo)
in cap - (KK) regulating valve to
jt s w ta ^-^ ^
, to E . (pp) aper .
122 CONDUCTICITY AND VISCOSITY
The acetone was dried over calcium chloride for at least a week before
using and was then redistilled several times immediately before making
up the mixed solvents. It had a mean specific gravity of 0.787 at 25,
and a specific conductivity of about 4Xl(T 7 at that temperature.
The conductivity water was obtained by the method of Jones,
McKay, and Schmidt, and had a mean specific conductivity of
1.5XKT 6 at 25.
The mixed solvents were prepared by mixing one or two parts of each
of the above components with varying proportions of the other two.
Seven such combinations proved to be possible, and were prepared for
solvents in one-liter quantities immediately before using.
The specific data relating to each solvent are to be found in table 33.
The rubidium and ammonium salts were all carefully recrystallized
from conductivity water, precipitated and washed with absolute
alcohol, then dried first in the steam oven, and finally pulverized and
heated in an air-bath at the most favorable temperature for the salt
in question. By this procedure, products of an exceptional purity were
obtained, and even in the case of ammonium iodide the concentrated
solutions became only slightly tinted after standing.
SOLUTIONS.
All solutions were made up as described by Davis and Hughes; the
concentrated solutions by direct weighing, the others by successive
dilutions. All operations were carried out at 20.
PROCEDURE.
Measurements both of conductivity and viscosity were made at 15,
25, and 35. The data were calculated in the usual way, tables of
constants and the use of a calculating machine greatly facilitating the
operation. The viscosity coefficients were obtained from the formula
where ri , s , and t Q are the viscosity, density, and time of flow of pure
water, and T/, s, and t the corresponding values for the liquid in question
in any given viscosimeter.
Fluidity, represented by <, is equal to - The temperature coeffi-
~n
cients in conductivity units represent the actual increase in molecular
conductivity per degree rise in temperature.
Per cent temperature coefficients, both of conductivity and fluidity,
were calculated from the formula :
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
123
VISCOSITY DATA.
TABLE 33. Density, specific conductivity, viscosity and fluidity of ternary mixtures of
glycerol, acetone, and water (G, A, W).
Mix-
ture? of
15
25
35
G A
W
d
M
.
<
d
M
f
<*>
d
A*
if
1 2
1 2
2
.0063
.0064
. 00343
.00215
0.03539
.03842
28.26
26.03
0.9984
0.9959
0.00468
.00294
0.02530
.02738
39.53
36.52
0.9902
0.9874
0.00613
.00390
0.01888
.02035
52.87
49.14
1 1
2
.0443
.00368 .04107)23.83
1.0377
.00508
.02951133.89
1.0308
.00676
.02174
46.00
1 1
1
.0515
.00237
.06379;15.68
1.0439
.00332
.04349
23.00
1.0354
.00453
.04116
32.09
2 1
2
.0905
.00233
.0809012.36
1.0839
.00333
.05414
18.47
1.0768
.00458
.03826
26.14
2 2
1
.0534
.00139
.08901
11.24
1.0453
.00202
.05954
16.80
1.0363
.00283
.05954
23.94
2 1
1
.1072
.00132
. 15296
6.54
1.0998
.00202
.09706
10.31
1.0923
.00293
.06474
15.45
TABLE 34. Viscosity and fluidity of salts in the 1-2-2 solvent (glycerol 1,
acetone 2, water 2), at 15, 25, 36.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-2-2 SOLVENT.
Mol.
cone.
Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Temp, coeff.
1,15
7j25
i35
015
025
035
15 to 25
25 to 35
0.60
.25
.10
Solv.
0.03571
.03608
.03506
.03539
0.02603
.02555
.02529
.02530
0.01950
.01959
.01887
.01888
28.00
27.72
28.52
28.26
38.42
39.14
39.54
39.53
51.28
51.05
52.99
52.87
0.0335
.0412
.0386
.0399
0.0371
.0304
.0340
.0337
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.03477
.03471
.03551
.03539
0.02532
.02494
.02550
.02530
0.01921
.01850
.01888
.01888
28.76
28.81
28.16
28.26
39.49
40.10
39.22
39.53
52.06
54.05
52.97
52.87
0.0373
.0390
.0392
.0399
0.0318
.0348
.0350
.0337
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.03486
.03483
.03540
.03539
0.02552
.02503
.02548
.02530
0.01954
.01860
.01913
.01888
28.69
28.71
28.25
28.26
39.19
39.95
39.25
39.53
51.98
53.74
52.27
52.87
0.0366
.0389
.0389
.0399
0.0326
.0345
.0331
.0337
124
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
TABLE 35. Viscosity and fluidity of salts in the 1-2-1 solvent (glycerol 1,
acetone 2, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
Mol.
cone.
- Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Temp, coeff.
,15
,25
7;35
015
025
#35
15 to 25 e
25 to 35
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.04089
.04004
.03950
.03842
0.02950
.02895
.02837
.02738
0.02228
.02180
.02134
.02035
24.45
24.98
25.32
26.03
33.90
34.54
35.25
36.52
44.88
45.87
46.86
49.14
0.0387
.0383
.0392
.0403
0.0324
.0325
.0329
.0345
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.03998
.03960
.03930
.03842
0.02878
.02873
.02819
.02738
0.02163
.02162
.02127
.02035
25.01
25.25
25.45
26.03
34.74
34.81
35.47
36.52
46.23
46.25
47.01
49.14
0.0389
.0377
.0394
.0403
0.0331
.0300
.0328
.0345
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.04090
.04064
.03830
.03842
0.02941
.02917
.02843
.02738
0.02214
.02196
.02132
.02035
24.45
24.61
26.11
26.03
34.00
34.28
35.17
36.52
45.17
45.54
46.90
49.14
0.0391
.0394
.0347
.0403
0.0328
.0328
.0333
.0345
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.04032
.03976
.03928
.03842
0.02880
.02864
.02818
.02738
0.02166
. 02154
.02112
. 02035
24.80
25.15
25.46
26.03
34.72
34.92
35.49
36.52
46.17
46.43
47.35
49.14
0.0400
.0388
.0394
.0403
0.0330
.0330
.0334
.0345
TABLE 36. Viscosity and fluidity of salts in the 1-1-2 solvent (glycerol 1,
acetone 1, water 2), at 15, 25, 36,
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
Mol.
cone.
Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Temp, coeff.
,15
ij25
ij35
515
525
535
15 to 25
25 to 35
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.04041
.04131
.04162
.04107
0.02857
.02926
.02940
.02951
0.02122
.02175
.02170
.02174
24.75
24.21
24.08
23.83
35.00
34.18
34.01
33.89
47.13
45.98
46.08
46.00
0.0414
.0412
.0412
.0423
0.0346
.0345
.0354
.0358
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.03923
.04068
.04140
.04107
0.02781
.02894
.02905
.02951
0.02062
.02152
.02166
.02174
25.49
24.58
24.15
23.83
35.96
34.55
34.42
33.89
48.50
46.47
46.17
46.00
0.0416
.0406
.0425
.0423
0.0349
.0345
.0340
.0358
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.03926
.04075
.04148
.04107
0.02792
.02885
.02915
.02951
0.02060
.02149
.02153
.02174
25.47
24.44
24.11
23.83
35.82
34.66
34.31
33.89
48.54
46.53
46.23
46.00
0.0406
.0418
.0423
.0423
0.0355
.0342
.0348
.0358
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.04050
.04130
.04170
.04107
0.02881
.02933
.02933
.02951
0.02126
.02173
.02176
.02174
24.69
24.21
23.98
23.83
34.71
34.09
34.09
33.89
47.04
46.02
45.96
46.00
0.0406
.0408
.0422
.0423
0.0355
.0350
.0348
.0358
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
125
TABLE 37. Vi
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
of salts in the 1-1-1 solvent (glycerol 1,
acetone 1, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
Mol.
cone.
Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Temp, coeff.
1,15
1/25
7j35
015
(25
035'
15 to 25
25 to 35
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.06371
.06358
.06335
.06379
0.04404
.04380
.04309
.04349
0.03196
.03158
i .03084
i .03116
15.70
15.73
15.79
15.68
22.71
22.83
23.21
23.00
31.29
31.67
32.43
32.09
0.0447
.0452
.0470
.0467
0.0378
.0387
.0397
.0395
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.06239
.06234
.06282
.06379
0.04402
.04307
.04340
.04349
0.03209
.03085
.03128
.03116
16.03
16.04
15.92
15.68
22.72
23.22
23.04
23.00
31.16
32.42
31.97
32.09
0.0417
.0447
.0447
.0467
0.0372
.0396
.0387
.0395
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.06353
.06338
.06317
.06379
0.04397
.04358
.04304
.04349
0.03190
.03143
.03088
.03116
15.74
15.78
15.83
15.68
22.74
22.05
23.23
23.00
31.35
31.82
32.38
32.09
0.0445
.0454
.0468
.0467
0.0378
.0385
.0394
.0395
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.06119
.06288
.06338
.06379
0.04247
.04333
.04449
.04349
0.03054
.03137
.03153
.03116
16.34
15.90
15.78
15.68
23.55
23.08
22.48
23.00
32.74
31.88
31.72
32.09
0.0435
.0451
.0425
.0467
0.0391
.0381
.0411
.0395
TABLE 38. Viscosity and fluidity of salts in the 2-1-2 solvent (glycerol 2,
acetone 1, water 2), at 15, 25, 35.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
Mol.
cone.
Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Temp, coeff.
,15
7725
,35
>15
025
035
15 to 25
25 to 35
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.07739
.08014
.08107
.08090
0.05334
.05355
.05432
.05414
0.03804
.03782
.03829
.03826
12.92
12.48
12.34
12.36
18.75
18.67
18.42
18.47
26.29
26.44
26.12
26.14
0.0450
.0497
.0493
.0494
0.0402
.0416
.0418
.0415
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.07575
.07730
.07967
.08090
0.05165
.05218
.05370
.05414
0.03693
.03654
.03782
.03826
13.20
12.94
12.55
12.36
19.36
19.16
18.62
18.47
27.08
27.37
26.44
26.14
0.0467
.0482
.0484
.0494
0.0398
.0427
.0419
.0415
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
0.50
j .25
< .10
ISolv.
0.07739
.07934
.08054
.08090
0.05202
.05366
.05320
.05414
0.03702
.03821
.03763
.03826
12.92
12.60
12.42
12.36
19.22
18.64
18.80
18.47
27.01
26.17
26.57
26.14
0.0488
.0479
.0514
.0494
0.0405
.0404
.0418
.0415
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
^0.50
, .25
.10
Solv.
0.07545
.07729
.07854
.08090
0.05175
.05206
.05417
.05414
0.03683
.03660
.03855
.03826
13.25
12.94
12.73
12.36
19.32
19.21
18.46
18.47
27.15
27.32
25.94
26.14
0.0458
.0484
.0450
.0494
0.0405
.0423
.0405
.0415
126
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
TABLE 39. Viscosity and fluidity of salts in the 2^2-1 solvent (glycerol 2,
acetone 2, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-2-1 SOLVENT.
Mol.
cone.
Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Ternp. coeff.
,,15
1725
,35
015
#25
#35
15 to 25
25 to 35
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
Gave a nc
0.08989
.08938
.08901
n-homoge
0.06071
.05906
. 05954
leous solut
0.04359
.04178
.04177
ion. Ac<
11.12
11.19
11.24
;tone sal
16.47
16.94
16.80
ted out.
22.94
23.83
23.94
0.0481
.0514
.0495
0.0392
.0407
.0426
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-2-1 SOLVENT.,
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.08985
.08939
.08915
.08901
0.06493
.06282
.06290
.05954
0.04867
.04437
.04371
.04177
11.13
11.19
11.22
11.24
15.40
15.92
15.90
16.80
20.55
22.54
22.88
23.94
0.0384
.0423
.0418
.0495
0.0336
.0416
.0502
.0426
TABLE 40. Viscosity and fluidity of salts in the 2-1-1 solvent (glycerol 2,
acetone 1, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
Mol.
cone.
Viscosities.
Fluidities.
Temp, coeff.
Tjl5
1,25
7? 35
!5
025
#35
15 to 25
25 to 35
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.15066
.15388
. 15462
. 15296
0.09583
.09781
.09812
.09706
0.06512
. 06633
.06623
.06474
6.64
6.50
6.47
6.54
10.44
10.22
10.19
10.31
15.36
15.08
15.10
15.45
0.0572
.0573
.0576
.0576
0.0491
.0475
.0481
.0499
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.14625
.15194
. 15408
. 15296
0.09322
.09682
.09779
.09706
0.06316
.06557
.06589
.06474
6.84
6.68
6.49
6.54
10.73
10.33
10.23
10.31
15.83
15.25
15.18
15.45
0.0569
.0546
.0576
.0576
0.0476
.0476
.0482
.0499
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.15177
. 15417
. 15550
. 15296
. 09650
.09816
.09814
-.09706
0.06575
.06652
.06624
.06474
6.63
6.49
6.45
6.54
10.36
10.19
10.19
10.31
15.21
15.03
15.10
15.45
0.0562
.0571
.0579
.0576
0.0468
.0476
.0482
.0499
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
0.50
.25
.10
Solv.
0.14709
.15211
. 15410
. 15296
0.09366
.09703
.09757
.09706
0.06352
. 06559
.06588
.06474
6.80
6.57
6.49
6.54
10.68
10.31
10.25
10.31
15.74
15.25
15.08
15.45
0.0570
.0568
.0579
.0576
0.0475
.0479
.0471
.0499
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
127
CONDUCTIVITY DATA.
TABLE 41. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
1-2-2 solvent (glycerol 1, acetone 2, water 2), at 15, 25, 35.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-2-2 SOLVENT.
Molecular
Temperature coefficients.
V
conductivities.
Per cent.
Cond. units.
Mr 15
Mr 25
M,35
15 to 25
25 to 35
15 to 25
25 to 35
2
23.50
30.93
39.20
0.0316
0.0267
0.743
0.827
4
23.14 29.33
35.92
.0267
.0225
.619
.659
10
25.87 32.06
39.39
.0239
.0242
.619
.659
50
29.10 37.09
47.57
.0275
.0283
.799
1.048
200
30.60 39.84
50.55 .0302
.0269
.924
1.071
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-2 SOLVENT.
2
25.90 | 33.99
42.76 0.0312
0.0258 0.809
0.877
4
25.74
33.58
43.85
.0305
.0306
.784
1.027
10
27.03 36.75
.0360
.972
50
30.08 40.08
51.10
.0332
.0275
1.000
1.102
200
30.61 i 41.00
52.49
.0339
.0280
1.039
1.149
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 122 SOLVENT.
2
25.81
33.87
42.86
0.0312
0.0265
0.806
0.899
4
26.60
34.99
44.44
.0315 .0270
.839
.945
10
28.72
38.00
48.70
.0323
.0282
.928
1.070
50
29.94
39.78
50.73
.0329 .0275
.984
1.095
200
31.14
41.69
53.60
.0339 .0286
1 055
1.101
TABLE 42. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
1-2-1 solvent (glycerol 1, acetone 2, water 1), at 15, 25, 36.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
V
Molecular
conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Per cent.
Cond. units.
Mr 15
M,25
M,35
15 to 25
25 to 35
15 to 25
25 to 35
2
4
10
50
14.78
15.82
17.24
19.10
19.35
20.74
22.69
25.50
24.49
26.45
29.12
32.87
0.0309
.0311
.0316
.0335
0.0266
.0275
.0288
.0289
0.457
.492
.545
.640
0.514
.571
.643
.737
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
800
18.33
19.00
20.00
21.40
22.56
24.23
23.81
24.68
26.22
29.25
29.85
32.80
30.24
31.41
33.74
36.51
38.69
42.00
0.0299
.0299
.0311
.0322
.0323
.0354
0.0270
.0273
.0287
.0291
.0296
.0280
0.548
.568
.622
.688
.729
.857
0.643
.673
.752
.823
.884
.920
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
15.94
15.41
17.34
19.28
19.72
20.45
22.81
25.82
24.94
26.24
29.23
33.22
0.0311
.0327
.0315
.0339
0.0265
.0283
.0282
.0287
0.468
.504
.547
.654
0.522
.579
.642
.740
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-2-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
18.23
18.80
19.88
23.66
24.67
26.36
30.28
31.26
33.54
0.0298
.0312
.0326
0.0283
.0267
.0272
0.543
.587
.648
0.662
.659
.718
128
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
TABLE 43. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
1-1-2 solvent (glycerol 1, acetone 1, water 2), at 15, 25, 35.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 112 SOLVENT.
Molecular
Temperature coefficients.
V
conductivities .
Per cent.
Cond. units.
Mr 15
M25
M35
15 to 25
25to3515to25;25to35
2
26.35
34.62
44.31
0.0314
0.0280
0.827
0.969
4
25.59
33.45
41.99
.0307
.0255 .786
.845
10
28.02
37.23
48.03
.0329
.0290 .921
1.080
50
28.75
39.86
51.71
.0386
.0297 1.111
1.185
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
2
27.42
35.96
45.94
0.0311 0.0278 0.854
0.998
4
26.80
35.39
45.36
.0320 | .0282 1 .859
.997
10
28.17
37.52
48.67
.0332 .0297 | .935 1.115
50
29.17
38.98
51.16
.0336
.0312 .981 1.218
800
32.40
43.92
57.46
.0356
.0308 1.152 i 1.354
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
2 26.57
35.19
44.71
0.0324 0.0263
0.862
0.952
4 25.98
34.29
43.03 .0320 i .0255
.831
.874
10
27.85
37.20
47.92 .0336
.0288
.935
1.072
50
29.40
39.48
51.17
.0343
.0296
1.008
1.169
800 31.99
43.36
55.44 .0349
.0279
1.117
1.208
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-2 SOLVENT.
2
27.54
35.86
46.36
0.0302 i 0.0293
0.832
1.050
4 26.40
35.22
45.21
.0334 .0284
.882
.999
10 27.93
37.62
48.68
.0347 .0294
.969
1.106
50 i 28.88
38.97
50.67
.0347 .0300
1.001
1.170
200 ! 30.82
41.47
54.02
.0346 .0303
1.065
1.255
800 i 31.86
43.01
56 . 34
.0350 .0310
1.115
1.333
TABLE 44. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
1-1-1 solvent (glycerol 1, acetone 1, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
V
Molecular
conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Per cent.
Cond. units.
M15
M.25"
Mr 35
15 to 25
25 to 35
15 to 25 25 to 35
2
4
10
50
200
15.22
15.68
16.51
17.67
18.19
20.56
21.20
22.53
24.41
25.30
26.80
28.02
29.71
32.33
33.43
0.0351
.0352
.0365
.0381
.0391
0.0304
.0322
.0319
.0325
.0321
534
552
602
674
11
0.624
.682
.718
.794
.813
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
16.07
16.67
17.65
19!23
21.95
22.93
24.24
28.81
29.98
31.90
0.0366
.0375
.0316
0.0313
.0307
.0316
0.588
.626
.659
0.686
.705
.766
.736
26.73
34.09
.0389
.0275
.750
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
129
TABLE 44. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
1-1-1 solvent (glycerol 1, acetone 1, water 1), at 15, 25, 85. Continued.
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
V
Molecular
conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Per cent.
Cond. units.
Me 16
Mv25
^35
15 to 25
25 to 35
15to25
25 to 35
2
4
10
50
200
15.21
15.71
16.56
17.84
18.50
20.57
21.41
22.58
24.59
25.52
27.11
28.45
30.03
32.88
34.13
0.0352
.0363
.0363
.0378
.0379
0.0418
.0329
.0326
.0337
.0338
0.536
.570
.602
.675
.702
0.654
.704
.745
.829
.863
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 1-1-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
15.57
16.86
17.43
17.87
18.72
20.51
23.04
23.68
24.38
26.05
25.87
30.35
31.84
33.20
34.67
0.0317
.0366
.0359
.0364
.0392
0.0261
.0317
.0345
.0362
.0331
0.494
.618
.625
.651
.733
0.536
.731
.816
.882
.862
TABLE 45. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
2-1-2 solvent (glycerol 2, acetone 1, water 2), at 15, 25, 85.
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
V
Molecular
conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Per cnet. Cond. units.
M,15
M,25
M*35
15 to 25
25 to 35
15 to. 5 25 to 35
2
4
10
50
200
15.04
15.55
16.66
17.54
18.15
20.75
21.59
22.99
24.58
25.54
27.45
28.66
30.30
32.92
34.47
0.0380
.0388
.0380
.0401
.0407
0.0323
.0327
.0318
.0339
.0350
0.571
.604
.633
.704
.739
0.670
.707
.731
.834
.893
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
15.32
15.57
16.42
17.07
17.12
21.29
21.78
22.98
24.06
24.24
28.25
29.02
30.58
32.38
32.66
0.0390
.0399
.0399
.0409
.0416
0.0328 ; 0.597
.0332 .621
.0331 .656
.0346 .699
.0347 ! .712
0.699
.724
.760
.832
.842
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
15.55
15.60
16.16
16.92
17.59
21.59 28.55
21.52 ! 28.86
22.52 I 30.13
23.78 32.08
24.73 ! 33.25
0.0388
.0379
.0394
.0406
.0406
0.0322
.0341
.0338
.0349
.0345
0.604
.592
.636
.686
.714
0.696
.734
.761
.830
.852
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-2 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
15.58
15.80
16.48
17.11
17.34
21.71
22.05
22.61
24.46
24.57
28.79
29.39
30.13
32.88
33.16
0.0393
.0396
.0372
.0430
.0417
0.0326
.0333
.0333
.0344
.0350
0.613
.625
.613
.735
.723
0.708
.734
.752
.842
.859
130
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
TABLE 46. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
2-2-1 solvent (glycerol 2, acetone 2, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-2-1 SOLVENT.
v
Molecular
conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Per cent.
Cond. units.
M*15
M,25
Me 35
15 to 25J25 to 35
15to25|25to35
2
4
10
50
200
Gave a
9.09
9.81
10.62
11.21
non-hoi
12.44
13.71
14.99
15.93
nogeneo
16.85
18.42
20.43
21.77
us solutio
0.0369
.0399
.0411
.0421
a. Aceto
0.0355
.0344
.0363
.0367
ne saltec
0.335
.391
.437
.472
lout.
0.441
.471
.544
.584
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 221 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
200
9.87
10.63
11.40
12.18
12.40
13.23
14.75
15.80
16.97
17.50
16.95
19.68
21.11
23.12
23.69
0.0340
.0388
.0386
.0393
.0411
0.0281
.0334
.0336
.0362
.0354
0.336
.412
.440
.479
.510
0.372
.493
.531
.615
.619
TABLE 47. Molecular conductivities and temperature coefficients of salts in the
2-1-1 solvent (glycerol 2, acetone 1, water 1), at 15, 25, 35.
AMMONIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
V
Molecular
conductivities.
Temperature coefficients.
Per cent.
Cond. units.
Mr 15
M,25
Mr 35
15 to 25
25 to 35
15 to 25
25 to 35
2
4
10
50
800
7.91
7.83
8.23
8.56
9.19
11.20
11.25
12.06
12.67
13.55
15.82
15.61
16.88
17.80
19.34
0.0416
.0437
.0465
.0480
.0474
0.0413
.0388
.0400
.0405
.0427
0.329
.342
.383
.411
.436
0.462
.436
.482
.513
.579
AMMONIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
800
8.08
8.16
8.38
8.87
8.69
11.79
11.97
12.29
13.10
12.84
16.46
16.77
17.31
18.55
18.36
0.0459
.0467
.0467
.0477
.0478
0.0396
.0401
.0408
.0416
.0430
0.371
.381
.391
.423
.415
0.467
.480
.502
.545
.552
RUBIDIUM BROMIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
800
7.62
7.68
8.10
8.50
11.19
11.19
11.93
12.55
12.62
15.53
15.57
16.74
17.72
17.83
0.0469
.0453
.0473
.0476
0.0388
.0395
.0403
.0412
.0413
0.357
.348
.383
.405
0.434
.441
.481
.517
.521
RUBIDIUM IODIDE IN THE 2-1-1 SOLVENT.
2
4
10
50
800
7.92 11.31
8.02 ; 11.79
8.26 i 12.16
8.53 12.67
9.26 ! 13.99
16.18
16.52
17.10
17.93
20.01
0.0420
.0470
.0472
.0485
.0511
0.0433
.0401
.0406
.0415
.0430
0.333
.377
.390
.414
.473
0.487
.473
.494
.526
.602
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES. 131
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS.
As in our preceding work with rubidium and ammonium salts in
glycerol and acetone and their binary mixtures with water, parallel
investigations in viscosity and conductivity have been carried out.
We have obtained measurements with both concentrated and moder-
ately dilute solutions over a wide range of ternary mixtures of the three
solvents employed. Although glycerol and acetone of themselves are
immiscible, the addition of about 20 per cent water gives a perfectly
homogeneous liquid which corresponds to our 2-2-1 solvent. However,
it should be noted that in this solvent which contains the lowest per-
centage of water in the series, it was impossible to obtain concentrated
solutions of the ammonium salts while the rubidium salts failed to go
into solution at concentrations above 1/200 N., since the acetone
immediately separated out giving a non-homogeneous solution.
As previously noted, table 33 shows the specific data relating to the
various mixtures, viz, the density, specific conductivity, viscosity, and
fluidity at all three temperatures studied. Reference to it will show
that, e. g., at 25, the standard comparison temperature, the solvents
possess densities ranging from 0.9984 for the 1-2-2 mixture to 1.0998
for the 2-1-1, while the viscosities for the same solvents vary between
0.02530 and 0.09706. Thus, the viscosities for the two extremes in
the series lie between those of 25 and 50 per cent glycerol and water
(0.02017-0.06021) for the former and between the 75 and 50 per cent
(0.0135-0.06021) for the latter extreme. The values, however, lie in
both cases nearest the least viscous glycerol mixture.
The specific conductivity of the 1-1-1 solvent is about 3,000 times
that calculated by averaging the specific conductivities of each of the
constituents. Jones and Davis 1 have noted that in mixtures of glycerol
and water containing 50 and 25 per cent glycerol, the specific conduc-
tivity was higher than for pure water. Their explanation is that the
OH ion is split off; i. e., the glycerol is dissociated by the action of the
water. Jones and Bingham 2 have shown that the molecular conduc-
tivity of an N/200 solution of potassium iodide in acetone is about the
same as in pure water. As the fluidity of acetone is about 2| times that
of water, the dissociating action of acetone would be of the order of
40 per cent that of water. The relative association factors of water
and acetone would lead to the same conclusion. While this conclusion
may not be quantitatively accurate, it is safe to say that_acetone is a
strong dissociating agent. It is therefore possible that OH ions are
split off from the glycerol by the combined action of the water and
acetone, and possibly some from the water. This dissociation would
explain the very high specific conductivities of the solvents used in this
investigation as compared with those calculated by averaging the
specific conductivities of the constituents.
Carnegie Inst. W T ash. Pub. No. 180. "Ibid., No. 80.
132 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
Jones and Lindsay, 1 continuing the investigation of the phenomenon
of minima in conductivity curves observed by Zelinsky and Krapiwin
and by Cohen, advanced the theory, based on the hypothesis of Dutoit
and Aston, that the decrease in conductivity and fluidity in solvents
consisting of mixtures of associated liquids, was due to the fact that
each liquid decreased the association of the other, thus decreasing the
size of the ultimate unit particles composing the solvent and increasing
the amount of frictional surface between them. With these two con-
ceptions in mind; i. e., the decrease in association of one associated
liquid by another and the subsequent effect of the size of the particles ;
it seems clear that by the addition of a third associated liquid to such
a binary mixture, the decrease in association would be carried farther,
resulting in an increased amount of frictional surface and decreased
fluidity. If the unit particles in the acetone were much larger than those
already in the binary mixture, the fluidity of the resulting ternary mix-
ture would be increased. This is not probable, as acetone is an asso-
ciated liquid and the presence of three such liquids, each decreasing
the association of the others, would, it is reasonable to conclude, result
in a large increase in the number of smaller particles. All conductivity
and fluidity measurements taken during this investigation support this
view. The comparisons named below furnish some of the evidence for
these conclusions.
To compare the results obtained with those calculated from averages,
consider the data obtained by Davis and Jones with glycerol-water
mixtures and by Davis, Hughes, and Jones with acetone-water mix-
tures. They used rubidium bromide in the following solvents: 75
p. ct. glycerol and 25 p. ct. water (A) ; 75 p. ct. acetone and 25 p. ct.
water (B) ; 50 p. ct. glycerol and 50 p. ct. water (C) ; 50 p. ct. acetone
and 50 p. ct. water (D).
It should be noted that the action of all four salts used in this inves-
tigation do not differ widely in the same solvents. The average
obtained with the 2-1-1 and 1-2-1 solvents can be compared with the
A and B solvents, since all contain 25 per cent water. The 75 per cent of
ternary mixture is, by averaging the 1-2-1 and 2-1-1 solvents, equally
divided between glycerol and acetone. Solvents C and D can be com-
pared with the 1-1-2 solvents, since all contain 50 per cent water.
The fluidity of the 1-1-1 solvent is about one-sixth that calculated
from averages; while the specific conductivity is, as noted above, about
3,000 times that calculated by the same method; hence the specific
conductivity of the solvent is 18,000 times that which would be
expected. While these figures can be considered only as a very rough
approximation, they indicate a relatively large dissociation in these
ternary mixtures.
l Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 80.
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES. 133
Further evidence for this view is obtained from the 1-2-2 solvent,
whose specific conductivity exceeds by a much larger amount that cal-
culated by the method indicated above. The relative amounts of
acetone and water are much larger in the 1-2-2 solvent than in the
1-1-1 ; hence a larger dissociation of the glycerol would be expected
from the law of mass action.
The viscosity and fluidity tables are arranged in groups under each
of the solvents. Thus, table 34 contains the data for rubidium bromide,
rubidium iodide, and ammonium iodide in the 1-2-2 solvent. A similar
arrangement is carried out for each of the seven solvents. Associated
with each table of viscosities is a corresponding table of temperature
coefficients, calculated by means of the formula given on page 122.
It has been shown that negative viscosity coefficients occur in all
cases of rubidium salts in glycerol-water mixtures, and also for ammo-
nium bromide and iodide in these solvents. Such was also found to be
true in acetone-water mixtures, wherever the percentage of water was
higher than that of acetone.
In the present investigation it appears that a similar behavior of
such salts manifests itself wherever the solvents are of the same general
nature as those mentioned above. Thus, negative viscosity coefficients
are to be observed in the case of all the salts studied in the 1-1-1, the
2-1-2, and the 2-1-1 solvents. Here it is evident that either glycerol
or water, or both, are present in greater proportions than acetone.
Since glycerol is a solvent closely allied to water in its properties, we
may disregard its enormous viscosity and compare these solvents with
those acetone-water mixtures in which the water is present in the
larger proportion; these solvents would then correspond to 25, 20,
and 25 per cent acetone-water mixtures, in so far as the acetone affects
the tendency of the salts to lower the viscosity of the solvent; while at
the same time, because of their glycerol content, they have viscosity
coefficients comparable with 50 to 25 per cent glycerol-water mixtures.
On the other hand, we have those solvents in which the percentage
content of acetone exceeds either of the other two separately. Under
this head are included the 1-2-1 solvent and, in certain instances, the
solutions in the 2-2-1 mixture.
In the case of the 1-2-2 and the 1-1-1 solvents an apparent fluctua-
tion is to be noted in the concentration curve for the various salts.
Thus, the more concentrated solutions increase the viscosity of the
solvent, while the more dilute lower it; a possible explanation of this
phenomenon is suggested later in discussing the conductivity data.
While this does not hold for all temperatures, it appears to be common
to all the salts studied.
Tables 41 to 47 show the molecular conductivity, temperature coeffi-
cients in conductivity units, and percentages of ammonium iodide,
134
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
ammonium bromide, rubidium iodide, and rubidium bromide in each
of the solvents. Figure 53 shows the conductivity curves of ammonium
iodide in the ternary solvents at 25 degrees, and figure 54 shows the
corresponding fluidity curves. While these curves have the same
general character, some marked differences are noticeable. The fluidi-
ties of glycerol, water, and acetone at 25 degrees are respectively 0.17,
112.30, and 288.95. The values for glycerol and water are taken from
the data of Jones and Davis and those for acetone from the work of
Jones and Bingham. A study of these two figures in the light of
the Thompson^Nernst 2 , and Dutoit- Aston 3 hypotheses will afford an
explanation of all cases of non-parallelism in the two sets of curves.
Since reducing the association of the solvent affects both its fluidity
and dissociation, and since the relative effect on each is not known,
the above explanation is to be regarded as only qualitative.
2-1-1 2-2-1 2-1-2 1-1-1 t-2-1 1-1-2 1-2-2 - Solvents
FIG. 53. Conductivity of ammonium iodide in glycerol, acetone, and water, at 25.
As an illustration, consider the change from the 1-1-1 solvent to the
1-2-1. The fluidity increases 5 times as much as the conductivity.
The changes affecting fluidity are as follows : the water changes from
33 to 25 per cent causing a small reduction; glycerol changes from
33 to 25 per cent causing a rather large increase, while acetone changes
from 33 to 50 per cent, causing a very large increase. The changes in
water and glycerol would each reduce the conductivity, while the
change in acetone would increase the conductivity much less than the
fluidity. A consideration of the above details makes it clear that a
much larger increase in fluidity than in conductivity should be expected.
Other changes from one solvent to another can be explained by
similar considerations. Thus, figures 55 and 56 show fluidity and
molecular conductivity curves for rubidium bromide in the 1-2-1 and
the 1-1-2 solvents at 15, 25, and 35. Jones, Davis, and Hughes
have shown that for glycerol-water mixtures and acetone-water mix-
tures, temperature coefficients for fluidity are larger than for con-
ductivity, because rising temperature decreases the dissociation.
l. Mag., 36, 320.
2 Zeit. phys Chem., 13, 531. (1894.)
'Compt. Rend., 125, 240. (1897.)
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES. 135
These curves show that the same relation is true for the ternary sol-
vents. Sufficiently dilute solutions have not been used in this work
to determine the dissociation accurately, no measurements beyond
N/800 having been made. The data obtained by Jones and Bingham,
and the work on glycerol-water and acetone-water mixtures indicate
that solutions more dilute than N/1600 must be used. Decrease in
dissociation from 15 to 35 is slight, and is not sufficient to explain
the difference between the fluidity and conductivity coefficients.
Rubidium and ammonium salts are not in the class of salts that form
complex solvates, yet of the known factors which affect conductivity
the formation of solvates is the only one which can explain the point
here raised. If a solvate is formed and the rise in temperature reduces
its complexity less than it increases the fluidity of the solvent, the
above is a satisfactory explanation. In this connection it should be
noted that Jones and Guy 1 have found some evidence for the formation
2-1-1 2-2-1 2-1-2 1-1-1 1-2-1 1-1-2 1-2-2 - Solvent!
FIG. 54. Fluidity of smmonium iodide in glycerol, acetone, and water, at 25.
of glycerolates by sodium and potassium salts. The acetone-water
investigation shows some evidence for the formation of solvates by
rubidium salts in a mixed solvent. Another factor which should be
investigated is the polymerizing action of acetone and the effect of
temperature on the complexity of the polymers.
It should be noted that figures 55 and 56 show two distinct types
of curves. In figure 55 both conductivity and fluidity curves are
regular, while in figure 56 both curves show a minimum. The mini-
mum occurs at the N/4 point. The effect on conductivity of the usual
increase in dissociation from N/2 to N/4 is overcome by the decrease
in fluidity, thus producing the minimum point. From N/4 to N/10
there is little change in fluidity, hence the increase in dissociation gives
the curves a sharp upward turn. In figure 55 the influence of increas-
ing fluidity and dissociation work together, producing a convex curve.
iCarnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 180.
136
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
Returning to the fundamental point; why do these rubidium and
ammonium salts cause conductivity minima and also fluidity minima
in some of these ternary solvents and not in others? In some cases,
a flat curve or a straight line is produced. In all such cases the fluidity
coefficients are negative. These negative coefficients occur only with
the solvents containing 40 and 50 per cent acetone. The first sug-
gestion would be that it was due to some specific effect of acetone on
the fluidities of these solvents, but a study of them and also of figure
58 renders this view open to question. The explanation suggested is
the polymerizing action of acetone. The normal action of these salts
is to produce positive fluidity coefficients on account of large molecular
volumes. The formation of a polymer would reduce the number of
Volume concentratii
: conductivity curves. = fluidity curves.
FIG. 55. Conductivity and fluidity of rubidium bromide in the 1-2-1 solvent at
15, 25, and 35.
molecules and hence diminish or overcome the action that results in
these positive coefficients. Jones and Mahin 1 have shown that cad-
mium iodide, lithium nitrate, and lithium acetate polymerize in acetone.
More data on the polymerization of inorganic salts is desirable.
Figure 57 shows for comparison the temperature coefficients of con-
ductivity and fluidity for an N/10 solution of ammonium iodide in the
ternary solvents at 15 to 25 and 25 to 35. There is a striking
similarity between the curves for the conductivity and fluidity coef-
ficients. 2 They are lower for the higher range in temperature, as
'Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 180.
2 The unusual feature shown by curve II for the 2-2-1 solvent is probably due to this solvent
containing 40 per cent of acetone, a very volatile liquid. This solvent also contains only 20 per
cent of water, which is the minimum amount necessary to cause these three liquids to form a
homogeneous mixture.
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
137
would be expected from the work in other solvents. The temperature
coefficients of conductivity are very close to those calculated from
averages from the data of the glycerol-water and acetone-water investi-
gations. As glycerol has a much higher temperature coefficient of
conductivity than either acetone or water, the solvents containing
the largest percentage of glycerol should have the highest coefficients.
The curves are in keeping with this fact.
Conductivity and fluidity in these ternary solvents is much below
the average. These considerations emphasize the fact that fluidity
outweighs all the other factors that affect conductivity. Furthermore,
as already noted, the fluidity data indicate that association is more
10
= conductivity curves.
: fluidity curves.
FIG. 56. Conductivity and fluidity of rubidium bromide in the 1-1-2 solvent at
5, 25, and 35.
reduced in the ternary than in the binary solvents, but a decreased
dissociation is not indicated, as might be expected from the deduction
of Jones and Lindsay.
It is important to determine what effect glycerol, acetone, and water
have on each other when constituting a ternary mixture. This investi-
gation has shown that the properties of these ternary solvents are
widely different from those which can be calculated from averages.
The curves of figure 58 are drawn to show the differences between the
measured and calculated conductivities and fluidities. To illustrate:
the fluidity of the 2-1-1 solvent is 10.31 at 25; calculated from averages
it is 100.4; the measured is thus 10 per cent of the calculated; hence
10 is the ordinate for the 2-1-1 point. The data for drawing the con-
138
CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY
ductivity curves are not as full as could be desired. For acetone the
value is taken from the data of Jones and Bingham 1 on potassium
iodide for a N/200 solution at 25. The data for rubidium bromide
in glycerol and in water are taken from the work of Jones and Davis. 2
The action of potassium and rubidium salts in relation to conductivity
are similar enough for the purpose of this comparison. The 2-1-1
ordinate shows that the measured conductivity is 19.2 per cent of the
calculated. That the curves have the same character is another evi-
dence for the close relation existing between conductivity and fluidity.
In figure 58 the solvents are arranged from left to right in the order
of the percentage of glycerol which they contain; hence the curves
show that the more glycerol the solvents contain, the more the con-
Conductivity and fluidity coefficients multiplied hy 100
t_3iS_8_8_8__S_8_|_*3_J
1 F
II F
III C
rvc
uidity coefficients 15' -25"
uidity coefficients 25 c -35
anduct vity coefficients 15'-25
>nductivity coefficients 25'-35' -
olvenU
\
\
z
\
3
\
n
2
^
\
2~
\\
/
\
'"
\
IV
:A
^^s
Ss^
\
\
,.'
2-1-1 2-2-1 2-1-2 1-1-1 I-!
A 1-1-2 1-5
-2 -
FIG. 57. Conductivity and fluidity temperature coefficients
for N/10 solution of ammonium iodide in glycerol,
acetone, and water.
ductivity and fluidity values depart from the calculatedTaverages.
The theory of Jones and Veazey states that viscosity is due to the
friction between the particles of the liquid. It is clear that the smaller
the particles the greater will be the amount of frictional j surf ace
between them; hence, the greater the viscosity of any homogeneous
liquid, the smaller must be the particles composing it. The density
of the liquid should also affect the viscosity. The densities of glycerol,
water, and acetone are 1.26, 1.00 and 0.79, respectively, while the
fluidities are in the ratio 1 : 702 : 1741 ; hence the variation in density
is so small in comparison with the variation in fluidity that the former
can be neglected. It seems probable that there is one other important
factor that affects fluidity, which must be considered in addition to
the size of the particle. The particle in a pure homogeneous liquid
would be either one molecule or an association of molecules.
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 80.
*IUd., No. 180.
OF CERTAIN SALTS IN TERNARY MIXTURES.
139
The conception of molecular volume is opposed to the view that
the glycerol particle is smaller than that of acetone or water. Acetone
and glycerol have the same molecular volume, calculated on the basis
of the simple molecule, i. e.,73; water has 18. Considering the associa-
tion factors, the molecular values are as follows: glycerol 150, acetone
92, water 72. From the latter consideration, glycerol has the larger
molecular volume, and hence should have the highest fluidity, which
is contrary to the facts. The error probably arises from the use of
the density factor in calculating molecular volume. The density of a
liquid is affected by both the density of the molecules and the spaces
between them. The kinetic molecular hypothesis states that for a gas
the space between the molecules is much greater than that occupied
by the molecules. For a liquid, the intermolecular space is less than
for a gas, and for a solid less than for a liquid. For liquids it seems
Solvents* 2-1-1 2-2-1 2-1-2
FIG. 58. Ordinates are percentages by which measured conductivity and fluidity
differ from the values calculated by averages.
Curve I, calculated from conductivity of Rbl at 25.
Curve II, calculated from fluidity of solvents at 25.
reasonable to believe that the density of the liquid gives no idea of the
density of the molecule or the space between them; and it is the latter
factor of intermolecular space as well as the size of the particle that
must be considered as the chief factor governing fluidity. Hence the
conception of molecular volume as applied to liquids is not opposed
to the theory that fluidity depends on the frictional surface between
the particles or molecular associations, and the necessary corollary
that the amount of frictional surface depends on the size of the par-
ticles. It should be noted in this connection that it is clear that the
intermolecular space of a gas is the most important factor affecting
its viscosity. It is reasonable to believe that the same factor must
be considered in studying the viscosity or fluidity of liquids, although
it is relatively less important than for gases. It is probable that the
present conception of molecular volume as applied to solids is approxi-
mately correct, since the intermolecular space may be so small that it
can be neglected.
140 CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY OF CERTAIN SALTS.
SUMMARY.
1. The conductivities of the ternary solvents make it probable that
water and acetone act as dissociating agents on glycerol.
2. The decrease in dissociation of one associated liquid by another is
much larger in a ternary than in a binary mixture, thus producing
decreased values in conductivity and fluidity.
3. A consideration of the hypotheses of Dutoit and Aston and of
Thompson-Nernst, together with the fluidities of glycerol, acetone, and
water, explain the differences between the conductivity and fluidity
curves in these ternary solvents.
4. Temperature coefficients of fluidity are larger than for conduc-
tivity, as in binary solvents. The formation of solvates is a possible
explanation of the difference between these coefficients.
5. The minimum point which occurs in some of the conductivity
curves is explained by considering the fluidity of the solution.
6. A possible explanation of the fluidity changes which produce
minima in the conductivity and fluidity curves is the polymerization
of the salts by the acetone.
7. The conductivity and fluidity values of the solvents containing
the largest percentage of glycerol are farthest below the values calcu-
lated by averages.
8. The temperature coefficients of conductivity are about the same
as those calculated from averages.
9. This investigation emphasizes the fact already known that
fluidity probably outweighs all the other factors affecting conductivity.
10. The conditions governing viscosity in a pure homogeneous liquid
are discussed from a physical point of view.
CHAPTER VII.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE ON THE SOLVATE THEORY OF SOLUTION
OBTAINED IN THE LABORATORIES OF THE JOHNS
HOPKINS UNIVERSITY. 1
About fifteen years ago the work which led to the present theory of
solution was begun in this laboratory. From a very simple begin-
ning, which did not have for its object the study of the nature of
solution in general, the work has widened in a fairly large number of
directions. There have already been published by my co-workers
and myself about eighty papers dealing with one or another phase
of the problem. These are fairly widely scattered through chemical
and physical literature, having been published in American, German,
French, and English scientific journals. In addition, the Carnegie
Institution of Washington, which has so generously supported the
work, and without which it would have been impossible to have car-
ried out many of the investigations, has published nine monographs
of researches bearing directly and indirectly on the question of the
nature of solution.
Taking all of these facts into account, it has seemed desirable to
discuss here, as briefly as possible, the more important lines of evidence
which have been brought out, bearing on the nature of that condition
of matter which gives rise to the sciences of chemistry, geology, and
to a large part of biology.
EARLIER WORK.
In the summer of 1893 I went to Stockholm to work with Svante
Arrhenius. He suggested that we carry out a research on the question
as to whether sulphuric acid forms a few definite hydrates when in the
presence of water, as the theory of Mendele"eff maintained. According
to this theory, some of these hydrates were very complex, one of
them containing as much as 100 molecules of water to 1 molecule of
sulphuric acid. Mendeleeff arrived at this conclusion chiefly from a
study of the specific gravities of aqueous solutions of sulphuric acid of
different concentrations. The specific-gravity curves showed certain
discontinuities or breaks, which Mendeleeff interpreted to mean the
existence of definite chemical compounds or hydrates.
At the suggestion of Arrhenius, I studied the problem in the following
way. Acetic acid was used as the solvent. The freezing-point lowerings
of the acid produced by adding different known amounts of water were
determined. The freezing-point lowerings produced by adding known
amounts of sulphuric acid to pure acetic acid were measured. The
freezing-point lowerings produced by adding, simultaneously, known
amounts of sulphuric acid and known amounts of water to known
'See paper in Journ. Franklin Institute, Nov. and Dec. 1913.
141
142 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
amounts of acetic acid were also determined. By comparing the three
sets of results, from Raoult's law we could calculate the composition
of the hydrates formed by the sulphuric acid, if any were formed.
We added large amounts of water relative to the sulphuric acid,
but could obtain no evidence of any hydrate of sulphuric acid more
complex than H 2 SO 4 ,2H 2 O, which is the well-known compound H 6 SO 6 .
We did not obtain the slightest evidence of the existence of any of the
more complex hydrates which Mendeleeff, from his work, had supposed
to exist. I was, therefore, at that time, thoroughly convinced of the
untenability of the Mendele"eff theory of hydrates, and, indeed, of any
theory of hydration. I regarded the ions in solution as having an
existence not only independent of one another, but also independent
of the molecules of the solvent. In a word, I was at that time firmly
convinced that no theory of hydration was necessaiy to explain the
facts that were then known. This seemed to be the view which was
held at that time also by most of those who founded the new school
of chemistry.
A comparatively few years later, my cooperators, Ota 1 and Knight, 2
brought to light certain facts which could not be explained in terms of
any relation that was then known. They found that certain double
salts, such as double chlorides, nitrates, sulphates, cyanides, etc., pro-
duced abnormally great lowering of the freezing-point of water when
the solutions were concentrated. What was more perplexing was the
fact that the molecular depression of the freezing-point increased with
the concentration beyond a certain definite concentration.
Similar results were found for a fairly large number of salts by Jones
and Chambers, 3 and by Chambers and Frazer working with Jones. 4
The salts studied by these workers were those that are known to be
very hydroscopic, to have great power of combining with water. The
question arose, what did these results mean? At that time I was
antagonistic to any hydrate theory. My experience in the laboratory
of Arrhenius had produced that state of mind; yet I was unable to
explain our results in terms of any other assumption than that a part
of the water present was combined with the dissolved substance, and
was therefore removed from playing the role of solvent. I ventured
this suggestion, for want of any better in 1900. 5
The suggestion of hydration in aqueous solution would explain the
results that had been obtained. If a part of the water present was
combined with the dissolved substance, there would be less water act-
ing as solvent ; and since freezing-point lowering is proportional to the
ratio between the number of molecules of the solvent and of the dis-
solved substance, the less solvent present the greater the lowering of
its freezing-point. It is one thing to make a suggestion which accounts
for the known facts; it is a very different matter to show that this is
1 Amer. Chem. Journ., 22, 5 (1899). 3 Ibid., 23, 89 (1900). 6 Ibid., 23, 103 (1900).
*lUd., 110 (1899). *Ibid., 512 (1900).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 143
the only reasonable suggestion which will account for them, to show
that the suggestion is true.
Aided by a grant from the Carnegie Institution of Washington, I
started Dr. Getman 1 on a more or less systematic study of the whole
problem. The question arose, were the results already obtained
limited to a few compounds, or types of compounds, or was this a
general phenomenon? We took up the study of acids, bases, and salts
in concentrated solutions, especially by the freezing-point and conduc-
tivity methods. We also studied the refractivities of many solutions.
RELATION BETWEEN LOWERING OF THE FREEZING-POINT OF WATER AND WATER
OF CRYSTALLIZATION OF THE DISSOLVED SUBSTANCE.
The work of Getman included the study of the lowering of the freez-
ing-point of water produced by concentrated solutions of the chlorides
of sodium, potassium, ammonium, lithium, barium, strontium, cal-
cium, magnesium, iron, and aluminium; the bromides of sodium,
potassium, lithium, barium, strontium, calcium, magnesium, and cad-
mium; the iodides of sodium, potassium, lithium, calcium, barium,
strontium, and cadmium; and the nitrates of sodium, potassium,
ammonium, lithium, calcium, magnesium, manganese, cobalt, nickel,
cadmium, zinc, aluminium, iron, and chromium. The relation between
lowering of freezing-point and water of crystallization can be seen very-
well from the curves. 2
The nitrates of sodium, potassium, and ammonium, which crystallize
without water, produce the smallest lowering of the freezing-point of
water. Then come the nitrate of lithium with 2 molecules of water,
calcium with 4, and a large number of nitrates each with 6 molecules
of crystal water; all give about the same lowering of the freezing-point.
Finally, the three nitrates of aluminium, iron, and chromium with 8
and 9 molecules of water, give the greatest lowering of the freezing-
point of water.
Relations similar to the above come out for the chlorides, the
bromides, and the iodides. 3 The freezing-point lowerings of water
produced by them are roughly proportional to the amounts of water
with which the salts crystallize.
If, on the other hand, we compare the chlorides with the bromides,
with the iodides, with the nitrates, similar relations manifest themselves.
It was found that chlorides, bromides, iodides, and nitrates which
have no water of crystallization, all produce about the same molecular
lowering of the freezing-point of water, and this is between 3 and 4.
lAmer. Chem. Journ., 27, 433 (1902) ; 31, 303 (1904) ; 32, 308 (1904) ; Zeit. phys. Chem.. 46, 244
(1903); 49, 385 (1904); Phys. Rev., 18, 146 (1904); Ber. d. chem. Gesell., 37, 1511 (1904).
2 See Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60, p. 24.
3 See Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60, pp. 20-26.
144 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
With salts that crystallize without water there is only a very slight
increase in the molecular lowering of the freezing-point with increase
in the concentration of the solution. The salts of lithium, which
crystallize with the same amounts of water, give approximately the
same depressions of the freezing-point.
If we compare the salts of the alkaline earths that crystallize with
6 molecules of water, they produce approximately the same lowerings ;
the nitrates of iron and aluminium with 8 and 9 molecules of water
give greater lowerings than the corresponding halogens with 6.
In the first case we have kept the acid constant and compared with
one another the salts of the different metals with the same acid. In the
second case we have kept the metal constant, and compared the salts of
a given metal with different acids. In both cases the relation between
lowering of the freezing-point of water by the dissolved substance and
water of crystallization of the dissolved substance manifests itself.
These salts that crystallize with the largest amounts of water produce
the greatest molecular lowering of the freezing-point of water. The
work was done with concentrated solutions, and it has already been
pointed out that for such substances the molecular lowering of the
freezing-point increases with the concentration of the solution.
We must now ask what bearing has this relation on the question of
hydration or non-hydration in aqueous solution? A moment's thought
will show that the bearing is a very direct one. If hydrates exist in
aqueous solution, those substances which in such solutions would form
the most complex hydrates would be the substances that would crystal-
lize from aqueous solutions with the largest amounts of water. This is
the same as to say that those substances which, in the presence of a large
amount of water, have the greatest power to combine with water, would,
other things being equal, be the ones to bring with them, out of aqueous
solution, the largest amounts of water as water of crystallization.
We could not, however, expect one of these phenomena to be strictly
a linear function of the other, since there are undoubtedly other factors,
such as shape of molecules, angles of crystals, etc., coming into play
in determining the exact composition of crystals.
That a relation such as was pointed out above holds so well and so
generally for such a large number of substances is very significant
and early led me to believe that the suggestion of hydration in general
in aqueous solution contained more truth than I imagined when it
was first suggested.
Having found a relation such as the above, we were led to look about
for others that would bear directly or indirectly on the problem in
hand. Before taking up these, another feature of the work of Getman
must be briefly discussed.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 145
APPROXIMATE COMPOSITION OF THE HYDRATES FORMED BY VARIOUS
SUBSTANCES IN SOLUTION.
The line of evidence just discussed seemed so strongly in favor of
the general correctness of the view that there is combination between
the dissolved substance and some of the water present, that Jones
and Getman 1 undertook to calculate the approximate composition of
the hydrates formed by the different substances, and by the same
substance at different dilutions.
The experimental work consisted in determining the freezing-point
of the solution and, consequently, the depression of the freezing-point
of water produced by the dissolved substance at the concentration in
question. From the freezing-point lowering the molecular lowering
was calculated.
The dissociation of the solution was measured by means of the
conductivity method. Knowing the dissociation, the theoretical
molecular lowering was calculated on the assumption that none of
the solvent was combined with the dissolved substance. The ratio
of the theoretical molecular lowering to the value found experimentally,
gave the proportion of all the water present that was uncombined.
The remainder of the water was, of course, combined with the dissolved
substance. The total amount of water present in any given solu-
tion could be readily determined. It was only necessary to take
the specific gravity of the solution by weighing a known volume of it.
Knowing the specific gravity and the concentration, it was, of course,
perfectly simple to determine the total amount of water in, say, a
liter of the solution. The total amount of water in the solution and
the percentage of combined water being known, the total amount
of combined water was known. Knowing the amount of dissolved
substance present in, say, a liter of the solution, and knowing the total
amount of water combined with it, it was perfectly simple, from
the molecular weights of the dissolved substance and the solvent,
to calculate how many molecules of water were combined with one
molecule of the dissolved substance. The results of such a calculation
are only approximations. In the first place, the conductivity method
of measuring dissociation is not accurate for concentrated solutions,
and there is no thoroughly accurate method known for this purpose.
The error here is, however, in all probability not very large. Another
source of error, which is probably larger, results from the assumption
that Raoult's law holds for concentrated solutions, i. e., that for con-
centrated solutions the lowering of the freezing-point is proportional
to the concentration. This is not strictly the case, and we do not
know at present how wide the deviation from Raoult's law is in con-
centrated solutions.
Carnegie last. Wash. Pub. No. 60.
146 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
Taking all of these factors into account, it still seems highly probable
that, by the method outlined above, we can arrive at a reasonably
close approximation to the amount of water combined with a molecule,
or the resulting ions, of a dissolved substance, under given conditions
of concentration. Whatever objection may be offered to this method
of calculating the approximate composition of the hydrates existing
in aqueous solution, it should be stated that it is the only general
method thus far worked out for throwing any light whatever on
this important problem. Jones and Getman applied this method of
calculating the approximate composition of hydrates to about 100
compounds salts, acids, and organic substances and to about 1,500
solutions of these substances. Their results have been recorded in
Publication No. 60 of the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
Salts of lithium form more complex hydrates than those of sodium
and potassium. This would be expected, since lithium salts crystallize
with water, while the salts of the other alkalies in general crystallize
without water.
Salts of potassium and ammonium generally crystallize without
water, and these compounds, as would be expected, combine with rela-
tively little water in aqueous solution.
Many salts of sodium crystallize without water, and these hydrate
very slightly. Other sodium salts, such as the bromide and iodide, crys-
tallize with water and show considerable hydrating power in solution.
Salts of calcium crystallize with water and all have, as would be
expected, large hydrating power. The halogen salts crystallize with
6, the nitrate with 4 molecules of water. The nitrate was found to
have less hydrating power than the chloride or bromide.
The salts of strontium resemble those of calcium, both in the amounts
of water with which they crystallize and with which they combine in
aqueous solution. Salts of barium crystallize with less water and
show less hydration than those of calcium and strontium.
The salts of magnesium have just about the hydration that would
be expected from their water of crystallization. The same may be
said of the salt of zinc that was studied.
Cadmium is of special interest. Its halogen compounds crystallize
with little or no water, and although cadmium belongs in the same
group with metals of large hydrating power, its halogens combine
with only a small amount of water. The nitrate of cadmium crystal-
lizes with 4 molecules of water and, as could be predicted, shows con-
siderable hydrating power.
The chloride and nitrate of magnesium show the hydration that
would be expected from their water of crystallization. The same may
be said of the salts of nickel, cobalt, and copper.
The chlorides and nitrates of aluminium, iron, and chromium crys-
tallize with large amounts of water and show great hydrating power.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 147
The strong mineral acids show some hydrating power, but the com-
plexity of the hydrate formed by these substances seems to pass
through a maximum. The acids thus differ from the salts.
Some 13 non-electrolytes were studied as to their hydration, and
none of them showed any appreciable hydration. The same applies
to the organic acids that were studied in this connection.
The following general relations were brought out by the work of
Jones and Getman. The total amount of water held in combination by
the dissolved substance increases as the concentration of the solution
increases. From what is known of mass action, this would be expected.
The number of molecules of water combined with 1 molecule of the
dissolved substance generally increases from the most concentrated to
the most dilute solution studied. In some cases, however, the number
of molecules of combined water seems to pass through a maximum.
These results, we believe, give us the approximate amounts of com-
bined water, and certainly the relative hydrating powers of the different
compounds with which we worked.
One other relation bearing on the question of hydration in aqueous
solution was brought out by the work of Jones and Getman.
RELATION BETWEEN THE MINIMA IN THE FREEZING-POINT CURVES AND
THE MINIMA IN THE BOILING-POINT CURVES.
It has already been pointed out that if we plot the molecular lower-
ings of the freezing-point as ordinates against the concentrations of
the solutions as abscissae, the curves have a well-defined minimum;
from this minimum they rise both with dilution and with concentration.
What is the meaning of this minimum? The curves rise with dilution
because of increasing dissociation ; they rise with increasing concentration
because the total amount of combined water increases with the concen-
tration of the solution; and consequently the lowering of the freezing-
point of the ever-decreasing amount of solvent water becomes greater and
greater. The minima in freezing-point curves are, then, the points where
the two opposite effects increase in dissociation with dilution and in-
crease in combined water with concentration, just offset one another.
The rise in the boiling-points of solvents produced by dissolved sub-
stances was also studied, and at different concentrations. Boiling-point
curves were plotted analogous to the freezing-point curves; i. e., molec-
ular rise in the boiling-point as ordinates and concentrations as abscissae.
These curves also had minima, and we interpreted the minima here in
a manner analogous to our interpretation of the minima in the freezing-
point curves they are the points of equilibrium between increasing dis-
sociation with dilution, and increasing hydration with concentration.
A comparison of the freezing-point with the boiling-point curves
brought out a relation of interest, and we believe of some importance
in the present connection. The minima in the boiling-point curves
148 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
occur at greater concentration than in the freezing-point curves.
What is the meaning of this relation? To see this we must first call
attention to one property of hydrates which has thus far not been
referred to. They are very unstable, and readily break down with
rise in temperature. This is easily seen if we consider the facts in the
case of a salt like calcium chloride. At ordinary temperatures there
may be as much as 30 molecules of water combined with 1 molecule
of the salt; while at the boiling-point of the saturated solution all of
the water can be removed except the 6 molecules with which the salt
crystallizes. The higher the temperature to which a solution is heated
the less the hydration in such a solution. Solutions, of course, boil
higher than they freeze. There is therefore less hydration in the
boiling than in the freezing solution. Consequently, to produce enough
hydration to give the minimum in the curve would require a greater
concentration of the solution at its boiling-point than at its freezing-point .
The fact is, then, not only in accord with the hydrate conception,
but could readily have been predicted from it, as a necessary conse-
quence of the theory.
RELATION BETWEEN WATER OF CRYSTALLIZATION AND TEMPERATURE OF
CRYSTALLIZATION.
Jones and Bassett 1 worked out the approximate composition of the
hydrates formed by a large number of substances, and also the following
relation. The hydrates, as we have seen, are very unstable systems.
They are readily broken down in solution with rise in temperature.
The hydrates which exist in solution at ordinary temperatures are
much more complex than those which the salts can bring with them
out of solution as water of crystallization. The hydrates are more
stable and more complex the lower the temperatures. We were, how-
ever, surprised, on examining the literature, to find the large number
of examples on record of salts crystallizing with varying amounts of
water, depending on the temperature at which the crystals were formed.
A few examples will be given to bring out the general relation that
the number of molecules of water of crystallization is larger the lower
the temperature at which the salt crystallizes.
CaCl 2
o w 2 r -A- 3 ^6 temperature of crys-
A S 2 X \ tallization is lower and
4 H 2<-> 1_
MgCl 2 6 H 2 O 1 Elevated temperatures
8 H 2 O / above 20.
10H 2 20.
6 H 2 O J """"'
12H 2 O....
10 to 12.
MnCl 2
2H 2
.... 20.
MnSO 4 3H 2 O....
25 to 31, as
a
4H 2 O
.... 15.
4H 2 O....
25 to 31.
6H 2 O
....-21.
5H 2 O....
15 to 20.
11 H 2 O
....-21 to -37.
7HjO....
or below 0.
12H 2 O
. . . . -48.
FeCls
anhydrous. . . .
80 and above.
FeCls 3JH 2 O
20.
2H 2 O
. . . . 60 to 80.
6 H 2 O
20 to - 16.
2|H 2
. . . . 40 to 60.
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60. Amer. Chem. Journ., 33, 534 (1905) ; 34, 291 (1905). Zeit.
phys. Chem., 52, 231 (1905).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 149
These examples suffice to show the general nature of the relation
between water of crystallization and the temperature at which the
salt crystallizes. This relation could have been foreseen as a necessary
consequence of the theory of hydrates in aqueous solution, and the
instability, with temperature, of those hydrates.
HYDRATE THEORY IN AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS BECOMES THE SOLVATE THEORY IN
SOLUTIONS IN GENERAL.
The earliest work on the problem of the nature of solution was
limited to water as the solvent. It was found that salts in general
have the power to combine with more or less of the water in which they
are dissolved have a greater or less hydrating power. This power
is, however, possessed to a very different degree by the different com-
pounds. As we have seen, the degree of hydration of a salt can be
approximately determined by the amount of water with which it
crystallizes at ordinary temperatures.
It having been made probable that hydration exists in aqueous
solution, the question arose, do dissolved substances have the power
to combine with other solvents in which they are dissolved?
To test this Jones and Getman 1 studied, by the boiling-point method,
solutions of lithium chloride and nitrate, and calcium nitrate in ethyl
alcohol. They used also a number of other salts. It was found that
the molecular rise in the boiling-point was not only greater than the
theoretical rise at nearly all of the concentrations studied, but the
molecular rise increases rapidly with the concentration of the solution.
The molecular rise of the boiling-point of ethyl alcohol, produced by
lithium chloride, increases from 1.28 at 0.07 normal to 2.43 at 2.07
normal. In calculating the theoretical molecular rise the dissociation
is, of course, taken into account. The dissociation decreases with the
concentration, which would tend to decrease the molecular rise in the
boiling-point. Notwithstanding this influence, we have seen that the
molecular rise in the boiling-point of solutions of certain salts in ethyl
alcohol increases as the concentration of the solution increases.
The differences between the theoretical and the experimental results
are in some cases quite large. Jones and Getman 2 interpreted these
results in ethyl alcohol in a manner analogous to that which they had
adopted in the case of aqueous solutions. The abnormally large rise
in the boiling-point of ethyl alcohol, produced by certain salts, and
the increase in the molecular rise of the boiling-point with increase
in the concentration of the solution, are due to combination between
the dissolved substance and part of the solvent to the formation of
ethyl alcoholates in solution. The part of the alcohol that is combined
with the dissolved substance is thus removed from the field of action
as far as solvent is concerned. There being less alcohol present acting
1 Amer. Chem. Journ., 32, 338 (1904). *Ibid., 339 (1904).
150 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
as solvent, the rise in its boiling-point produced by a given amount
of dissolved substance would be larger than if all the alcohol were
playing the part of solvent.
Further, if the dissolved substance combines with a part of the
alcohol, the more concentrated the solution the greater the total
amount of alcohol held in combination. This would explain the
increase in the molecular rise in the boiling-point with increase in tha
concentration of the solution. This suggestion of combination between
a part of the solvent and the dissolved substance explains the facts
in alcoholic solutions just as well as the hydrate theory explains the
facts in aqueous solutions.
The work of Jones and Getman in solutions in ethyl alcohol as the
solvent was extended by Jones and McMaster to methyl alcohol.
They also extended the work in ethyl alcohol as the solvent. They
repeated a part of the work of Jones and Getman in ethyl alcohol and
obtained results of the same general character as had been found by
the earlier workers.
They used the boiling-point method with methyl alcohol as the
solvent, and the chloride, bromide, and nitrate of lithium as the dis-
solved salts. The molecular rise in the boiling-point, even in the most
dilute solutions, was greater than could be accounted for by the disso-
ciation. This is, of course, entirely incapable of accounting for the
increase in the molecular rise with increase in the concentration of the
solution, which manifests itself in the case of every salt studied in this
solvent, dissociation decreasing with increase in concentration, which
would tend to diminish the molecular rise in the boiling-point.
The magnitude of the molecular rise in the most concentrated solu-
tions is very large indeed. It is almost twice the boiling-point constant,
or normal molecular rise for this solvent; and the dissociation of such
solutions is certainly not more than 25 to 30 per cent, and probably
less than this value.
We interpreted these results as we did those in ethyl alcohol as the
solvent there is combination between a part of the alcohol present
and the dissolved substance, forming methyl alcoholates. As the con-
centration increases, more and more alcohol is held in combination
by the dissolved substance; consequently, there is an increase in the
molecular rise of the boiling-point.
It thus seems that evidence was furnished of combination between
methyl alcohol and the dissolved substance, on the one hand, and
ethyl alcohol and the dissolved substance on the other. As we shall
see later, evidence has been obtained of combination between acetone
and substances dissolved in it; and other solvents have been and are
being brought within the scope of this work.
In every case thus far investigated there seems to be good evidence
in favor of the view that there is combination between the dissolved
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 151
substance and a part of the solvent present. In a word, combination
of solvent with dissolved substance solvation seems to be a more or
less general phenomenon. The original hydrate theory thus becomes
the solvate theory of solution.
TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS OF CONDUCTIVITY AND HYDRATION.
A fairly elaborate investigation on the conductivities, dissociation,
and temperature coefficients of conductivity and dissociation of aque-
ous solutions was begun in my laboratory about 15 years ago and is
still in progress. The work, as a whole, has been recently published
by the Carnegie Institution of Washington. 1 The monograph in
question contains the investigations of Clover, 2 Hosford, 3 Howard, 4
Jacobson, 5 Kreider, 6 Shaeffer, 7 Smith, 8 Springer, 9 West, 10 Wight, 11
Wightman, 12 and Winston. 13 The results published in this monograph
are for about 110 salts, which were studied from zero to 65, and from
the most concentrated solution that could be used to the dilution
in most cases of complete dissociation. The temperature coefficients
of conductivity were calculated both in conductivity units and in
percentage.
Similar data were obtained for about 90 of the more common organic
acids, and the constants for the weaker acids were calculated from the
Ostwald dilution law. The dissociations of the salts and acids at the
different temperatures were, whenever possible, also calculated.
The temperature coefficients of conductivity were calculated both
in percentage and in conductivity units. A study of the temperature
coefficients of conductivity, expressed in conductivity units, brought
out a relation which had a very direct bearing on the question of
hydration in aqueous solution. This is so important that it will be
discussed here in some detail.
The conductivity of a solution is conditioned by the number of ions
present and the velocities with which they move. Rise in temperature
not only does not increase the number of ions present, but, as is well-
known, diminishes dissociation. The effect of rise in temperature
increasing the conductivity of solutions is, then, due to an increase in
the velocities with which the ions move. If the ion is driven by a
constant force, its velocity would be determined chiefly by the viscosity
of the solvent and by the mass and size of the ion. With rise in
temperature the driving force would be increased. Rise in tempera-
ture would also decrease the viscosity of the solvent. The effect of
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 170. *Ibid., 50, 1 (1913).
2 Amer. Chem. Journ., 43, 187 (1910). 9 Ibid., 48, 411 (1912).
3 Ibid., 46, 240 (1911). "Ibid., 44, 508 (1910).
*Ibid., 48 500 (1912). "Ibid., 42, 520 (1909); 44, 159 (1910).
& Ibid., 40 355 (1908). a lbid., 46, 56 (1911); 48, 320 (1912).
Ibid., 45, 282 (1911). "Ibid., 46, 368 (1911).
Ubid., 49, 207 (1913).
152
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
rise in temperature on both of these factors would be to increase the
velocities of the ions and, consequently, the conductivity.
Another factor must, however, be taken into account. That many
ions in aqueous solutions are strongly hydrated seems now quite
generally accepted. We have seen that these hydrates are relatively
unstable and break down with rise in temperature. The simpler the
hydrate formed by an ion, the smaller the mass of the ion; the smaller
the mass of the ion, other things being equal, the less resistance it
will offer when moving through the solvent. Therefore, rise in tem-
perature should increase the velocity of the ion.
TABLE 48. Temperature coefficients of conductivity.
Temperature coefficients ia
conductivity units.
hydrating power.
25 to 35
50 to 65
= 8
= 1024
v = 8
o=1024
Sodium chloride
2.00
2.46
2.27
2.82
Sodium bromide
1.89
2.18
2.79
Sodium iodide
2.12
2.54
2.33
3.14
Sodium nitrate
2.04
2.45
2.02
2.67
Sodium chlorate
1.77
2.22
2.15
2.90
Potassium chloride
2.39
2.84
2.45
3.11
Potassium bromide
2.43
2.91
2.45
3.11
Potassium iodide
2.38
2.91
2.65
3.37
Potassium nitrate
2.08
2.16
2.31
2.83
Potassium chlorate
2.02
2.52
2.23
2.94
Potassium permanganate. . .
2.04
2.31
2.29
2.23
Potassium sulphocyanate. . .
2.20
2.56
2.34
Ammonium chloride
2.42
2.94
2.51
3.69
Ammonium bromide
2.32
2.86
2.58
3.11
Ammonium nitrate
2.17
2.50
2.33
3.04
If decreasing complexity of the hydrate formed by the ion with
rise in temperature plays any prominent part in determining the large
temperature coefficient of conductivity, since the complexity of such
hydrates would decrease more with rise in temperature, we should
expect to find that the ions which have the greatest hydrating power
would have the largest temperature coefficients of conductivity. This
is a concrete and, it would seem, necessary consequence of the hydrate
theory in aqueous solutions. Further, it is one which can be tested
directly by experiment. Is it true?
We have seen that the hydrating power of a salt, or the ions into
which it dissociates, is approximately proportional to the number of
molecules of water with which it crystallizes. This is the same as to
say that the salt which has the greatest power to bring water with it
out of solution is the one, other things being equal, which would hold
the largest number of molecules of water in combination with it in
solution. The question is, therefore, is there any relation between
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
153
the number of molecules of water with which a salt crystallizes and
its temperature coefficients of conductivity?
This relation has already been discussed in Publication No. 170 of
the Carnegie Institution of Washington, in which the results of our
work on conductivity and dissociation has been published. Tables 48
and 49, showing temperature coefficients in conductivity units between
the temperatures 25 and 35, on the one hand, and between 50 and
65 on the other, at the dilutions | and y^ normal, are taken from the
monograph referred to above.
TABLE 49. Temperature coefficients of conductivity.
Temperature coefficients in
conductivity units.
Substances with large
hydrating power.
25 to 35
50 to 65
8
r = 1024
= 8
= 1024
Calcium chloride
3.49
4.85
Calcium bromide
3.73
5.00
4.03
6 03
Calcium nitrate
3.09
4.79
3.33
Strontium chloride
3.37
5^13
3.92
6.02
Strontium bromide
3.66
5.27
4.08
Strontium nitrate
2.76
4.86
3.58
Barium nitrate
3.09
4.74
3.34
Magnesium chloride
3.40
4.72
3.61
Magnesium bromide
3.55
4.44
4.08
Magnesium nitrate
3.10
4.78
3.57
Zinc nitrate
3.13
4.47
3.43
5.41
Manganous chloride
3.14
4.86
3.43
6.37
Nickel chloride
3.41
5.04
3.01
Nickel nitrate
3.21
4.58
Cobalt chloride
3.39
4.95
3.54
Cobalt bromide
3.32
4.96
3.75
Cobalt nitrate
3.20
4.67
3.05
Cupric nitrate
3.18
4.88
Aluminium chloride
4.57
8.64
5.16
12.49
Aluminium nitrate
4.19
7.86
4.87
11.65
We have seen that the hydrates formed by a large number of salts,
including those given in tables 48 and 49, have already been worked
out, 1 and that water of crystallization is a rough measure of water of
hydration. The salts in table 48 crystallize with little or no water,
and in aqueous solution are very little hydrated; those in table 49, in
general, crystallize with large amounts of water and are strongly
hydrated compounds.
Let us compare the temperature coefficients of conductivity in con-
ductivity units (which are the actual increases in molecular conduc-
tivity per degree rise in temperature) of the substances in table 48
with those in table 49. It will be seen that the coefficients for the sub-
stances in table 48 are, at all dilutions and temperatures, much smaller
'Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60.
154 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
than those in table 49. In making this comparison we must, of course,
take into account the fact that the substances in table 48 are binary
electrolytes, each molecule breaking down into 2 ions, while the sub-
stances recorded in table 49 are all ternary electrolytes, each mole-
cule breaking down into 3 ions, except the two salts of aluminium
which are quaternary electrolytes, each molecule yielding 4 ions. Even
taking all of these facts into account, the temperature coefficients
of conductivity for the slightly hydrated salts are much smaller than
those for the strongly hydrated compounds. This is exactly what
would be expected. The complexity of the hydrates of slightly
hydrated salts could change only a little with rise in temperature.
Consequently, the mass of the hydrated ion would change only slightly
with rise in temperature, and this effect of temperature on conductivity
would be very small.
Another relation manifests itself when we compare the results in
table 48 with one another, and those in table 49 with one another. If
the temperature coefficient of conductivity is a function of the decreas-
ing complexity of the hydrate formed by the ion, as the temperature
is raised we should expect that those substances which have equal
hydrating power would have approximately the same temperature
coefficients of conductivity.
The substances in table 48 have only slight hydrating power, shown
by the fact that they crystallize with little or no water. The fact is,
their temperature coefficients of conductivity are all of the same order
of magnitude.
The salts in table 49 have different hydrating power, but all have
great power to combine with water in aqueous solution. A large
number of these compounds have approximately the same hydrating
power, as would be expected from the fact that many of them crystal-
lize with 6 molecules of water. Barium chloride crystallizes with only
2 molecules of water, yet forms hydrates of complexity comparable
with the other salts 1 in this table. Its temperature coefficients are of
the same order of magnitude as those of the other substances in the
table. Manganous chloride with 4 molecules of water of crystalliza-
tion, and copper chloride with 2, form hydrates of the same degree of
complexity as the other salts in this table. Their temperature coef-
ficients are in keeping with this fact. The chloride of aluminium
crystallizes with 6 molecules of water and the nitrate with 8. These
salts, as has already been pointed out, break down yielding 4 ions
each. Their temperature coefficients are larger than those of the
ternary electrolytes.
The more dilute the solution, the more complex the hydrate formed
by the molecule or the ion. This is but the expression of the action
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60, pp. 75, 76.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 155
of mass: the more water there is present the more will be combined
with the dissolved substance. The more complex the hydrate the
greater the change in the complexity of the hydrate with rise in tem-
perature. Since the magnitude of the temperature coefficients of
conductivity seems to be a function of the change in the complexity
of the hydrate with rise in temperature, it follows, from the hydrate
theory, that the temperature coefficients of conductivity for any given
substance should be greater at the higher dilution than at the lower.
A comparison of the results at the two dilutions for any given sub-
stance in table 48 or table 49 will show that the above consequence of
the hydrate theory is confirmed by the facts. The temperature coef-
ficients are larger at the higher dilution for every substance recorded
in both tables.
One other relation should be pointed out before leaving the discussion
of the temperature coefficients of conductivity. We have seen that
the hydrates are unstable, and that with rise in temperature they
break down. The higher the temperature to which they are heated
the more unstable they become. We should, therefore, expect the
hydrates to break down more rapidly as the temperature goes higher.
If this were the case, the higher the temperature of the solution the
larger the temperature coefficients of conductivity. If we compare
the results for any given substance in table 48 or 49 we will find that
such is the case. The temperature coefficients for any given dilution
are higher between 50 and 65 than between 25 and 35.
The above four conclusions from the solvate theory of solution, as
far as aqueous solutions are concerned, are confirmed at every point
by the results of measuring the temperature coefficients of conductivity.
Without this theory it does not appear to be simple to explain the
above relations. The agreement between the four deductions from
the theory and the experimental results is so satisfactory that it is
regarded as strong evidence in favor of the general correctness of
the theory.
RELATION BETWEEN THE HYDRATION OF THE IONS AND THEIR IONIC VOLUMES.
Jones and Pearce 1 worked out the approximate composition of the
hydrates formed by a large number of salts, using the freezing-point
and conductivity methods already referred to. They found the
following relation between the volumes of the ions and their power
to form hydrates. The atomic volume curve is obtained by plotting
the atomic weights of the elements as abscissae against the atomic
volumes as ordinates. This curve, as is well-known, contains well-
defined maxima and minima. At the maxima are the alkali elements,
the three with the largest atomic volumes being potassium, rubidium,
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 180, p. 57; Amer. Chem. Journ., 38, 736 (1907).
156 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
and caesium. The salts of these elements generally crystallize without
water, and therefore have very little hydrating power in aqueous
solution. The approximate hydration 1 of salts of potassium has been
determined by the method usually employed and has been found to
be small.
Some of the salts of lithium and potassium crystallize with 2 and
3 molecules of water, and these have been shown to have some hydrat-
ing power. 1 The atomic volumes of lithium and sodium are much
smaller than those of potassium, rubidium, and cesium.
Turning from the maxima of the curve to the minima, at the mini-
mum of the third section of the curve are iron, cobalt, nickel, and
copper. Salts of these metals crystallize with large amounts of water,
and in aqueous solution they form complex hydrates.
Aluminium falls at the second minimum of the atomic volume curve,
having a somewhat greater atomic volume than iron. The salts of
aluminium crystallize with large amounts of water, some of them with
6 and 8 molecules. In aqueous solution they form complex hydrates. 1
Barium has the largest atomic volume of members of its group; its
salts crystallize without water or some with 2 molecules of water.
Many of the salts of calcium, strontium, and magnesium crystallize
with 6 molecules of water. Magnesium has the smallest volume of
any element of this group; it has been found to have the greatest
hydrating power of any member of the group. Strontium has a
slightly larger atomic volume than calcium and has a somewhat smaller
power to form hydrates. Taking all of the facts into account, it
would seem that, other things being equal, the smaller the cation the
greater its hydrating power. This raises the question, which ion is it
that forms the hydrate? Do both ions form hydrates. If so, which
has the greater hydrating power?
The different salts of certain metals have approximately the same
hydrating power. The common constituent of these salts is of course
the cation, the anion varying from salt to salt. This would indicate
that it is primarily the cation which conditions the hydrating power
of a salt. Since the different salts of the same metal do not all have
the same hydrating power, it seems reasonable to assume that the
anion has some power to form hydrates in the presence of water. The
cation is, then, the chief hydrating agent, and its hydrating power
seems to be a function of its size or atomic volume the smaller the
ion the greater its power to hold water in combination with it in
aqueous solution.
This raises the question, why is this the case? It has occurred to
me that the electrical density of the charge on the ion may have some-
thing to do with this relation. Other things being equal, the smaller
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 157
ion has the greater density of charge upon its surface; this might
enable it to hold more molecules of water in combination with itself.
There seem, however, to be certain physical objections to this explana-
tion of the relation in question. Whatever the explanation, the fact
remains.
HYDRATION OF THE IONS AND THE VELOCITIES WITH WHICH THEY MOVE.
Certain apparent discrepancies presented themselves in the velocities
of the different ions, which, for a tune, could not be explained. It was
known that the lithium ion, under the same driving force, moves more
slowly than potassium; and yet it has smaller volume and smaller
mass. It was not until it was shown 1 that the lithium ion is more
strongly hydrated than sodium or potassium that this fact could be
explained, and other apparent discrepancies presented themselves.
A relation between the migration velocities of the ions and their hydrat-
ing power was worked out by Jones and Pearce. 2 Their discussion is
repeated here to bring out the point in question.
The velocities of the ions in moving through any given medium is
known to vary inversely as their mass, the driving force being constant.
Their velocities would also vary inversely as their volumes. Mass
being constant, we should expect the ions with the smallest atomic
volumes to move the swiftest under a constant driving force, while
the facts are often the opposite. Leaving out of account the hydrogen
and hydroxyl ions, potassium, rubidium, and caesium have very great
velocities and the largest volumes; while the ions of the iron and
copper group have the smallest volumes and very small velocities. The
meaning of this apparent discrepancy can be seen at once by com-
paring the atomic volume curve and the migration velocity curve.
The ions with the smallest volumes have the greatest hydrating
power. The ions with the smallest volumes frequently have the
smallest velocities. Therefore, the ions with smallest velocities fre-
quently have the greatest hydrating power. To discuss the relations
somewhat in detail, the atomic volumes of potassium, rubidium, and
caesium increase rapidly with increasing atomic weight, and their salts
generally crystallize without water. The atomic volumes of sodium
and lithium are less than half that of potassium, and yet their velocities
are only about two-thirds that of potassium. It will be recalled that
salts of sodium and lithium may crystallize with 2 or 3 molecules of
water. We may therefore assume that the increase in the volume
and mass of the lithium and sodium ions, due to the formation of a
hydrate, decreases the velocity of these ions below that of potassium.
The small velocity of the lithium ion was, as we have seen, for a long
time unexplained. It has a volume only about half that of sodium,
and the largest ascertained amount of water with which the salts of
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 60. 'Ibid., 180, pp. 84-86.
158 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
lithium crystallize is 3. The maximum amount for many of the salts
of sodium is 2. The lithium ion is, in general, more hydrated than the
sodium ion, and its velocity is therefore decreased more by hydration.
Notwithstanding its smaller volume and lighter mass, on account of its
greater hydration lithium moves with about the same velocity as
sodium.
The calcium ion is slightly larger than sodium, but has considerably
smaller velocity. This is undoubtedly due primarily to its much
greater hydrating power. Within this group the atomic volumes
increase with increasing atomic weight. The velocities of calcium
and strontium, with many salts crystallizing with 6 molecules of water,
are approximately equal to that of barium. Many of the salts of
barium crystallize with 2 molecules of water or water-free. The larger
mass of the barium ion itself diminishes the velocity. Magnesium,
with about half the volume of calcium, has nearly the same velocity,
due to its greater hydrating power. The cobalt, nickel, and copper ions
have nearly the same volumes and approximately the same hydrating
power. They have approximately the same velocities.
The atomic volumes of the chloride, bromide, and iodide ions are
approximately the same. If they hydrate at all we should expect the
same order of hydration for all three, as has been made probable. We
should expect them to have velocities of the same order of magnitude,
and such is the fact.
The silver ion is the only well-established exception. It has a small
volume and many of its salts crystallize without water. Although
it has small volume, it apparently has but little hydrating power.
Notwithstanding its considerable mass, with its small volume and
small hydrating power we should expect it to have a fairly high velocity.
The fact is, the velocity of the silver ion is slightly less than that of
chlorine, bromine, and iodine.
The general truth of the relation that the ions with the smallest
velocities have the greatest hydrating power is, then, established by
the facts, the great hydrating power being one of the factors condition-
ing the small velocity.
DISSOCIATION AS MEASURED BY THE FREEZING-POINT METHOD AND BY
THE CONDUCTIVITY METHOD.
When the theory of electrolytic dissociation was proposed, it became
a problem to measure accurately the magnitude of dissociation.
Arrhenius pointed out, in his original epoch-making paper, that
dissociation could be measured either by the freezing-point or by the
conductivity method. The conductivity of a few electrolytes was first
worked out accurately by Friederich Kohlrausch, by a method which
he devised for the purpose. This work was done before the theory
of electrolytic dissociation was proposed. Kohlrausch's data were
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 159
used to calculate the magnitude of the dissociation of the electrolytes
with which he worked, at the various dilutions of the solutions.
Another method of measuring the dissociation of electrolytes, based
upon the change in the solubility of a salt on the addition of a second
salt with a common ion, was developed theoretically by Nernst 1 while
working in Ostwald's laboratory. When applied experimentally it
gave dissociations which were different from those obtained by the
conductivity method. The freezing-point method had not been used
at that time to measure dissociation. There was then a period when
there were but two methods for measuring dissociation, and these gave
widely different results. During this period the point was made
against the dissociation theory, that if dissociation took place in the
presence of water there was no means of determining its magnitude.
At this time Ostwald so improved the freezing-point method that it
could be used to measure dissociation. He started me to work on the
application of this method, and we 2 measured the dissociation of a fairly
large number of salts. The results differed radically from those
obtained by the solubility method, but agreed fairly well with those
calculated from the conductivity method of Kohlrausch. It was
afterwards shown that an assumption had been made in applying the
solubility method, which, when corrected, enabled that method to give
essentially the same results as those obtained by the other two.
A comparison of the data from the freezing-point method with those
from the conductivity method showed that Association as measured
by the former was slightly higher than by the latter. The meaning
of this discrepancy was at that time not understood.
After it had been established, with reasonable certainty, that hydra-
tion takes place in aqueous solution, a possible explanation of this
apparent discrepancy presented itself. But before offering this expla-
nation it seemed desirable to do more experimental work, having this
point especially in mind. Pearce 3 carried out in my laboratory a very
careful piece of work, in which dissociation was measured by the
freezing-point method and also by the conductivity method, and the
two sets of results were compared. We worked with the chlorides of
calcium, strontium, magnesium, barium, cobalt, copper, and alumin-
ium; with the nitrates of calcium, magnesium, barium, cobalt, nickel,
and copper; with sodium bromide, and with hydrochloric, nitric, and
sulphuric acids.
That hydration can explain the fact that dissociation as measured
by freezing-points is higher than as measured by conductivity can be
seen from the following. The combined water is removed from the
field of action as solvent ; only the uncombined water is acting as
solvent. Freezing-point lowering is proportional to the ratio between
^eit. phys. Chem., 4, 1372 (1889). 'Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 180, p. 57.
2 Ibid.,ll, HO, 529; 12, 633 (1893).
160
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
the number of molecules of the dissolved substance and of the solvent.
If one-fourth of the water present is combined with the dissolved
substance, the freezing-point lowering would be one-fourth greater
than if all the water were present as free water and therefore acting
as solvent water. Freezing-point lowering would thus be affected pro-
portionally by hydration. Dissociation of concentrated solutions
calculated from the freezing-point lowering would therefore be much
too high.
The conductivity of a solution depends upon the number of ions
present and their velocities. The number of ions would probably not
be affected greatly by the hydration, but their velocities would be.
The hydrated ions, would, of course, move more slowly than the
unhydrated.
The effect of hydration would obviously be more pronounced on
freezing-point lowering, which is proportional to the amount of solvent
present, than on conductivity. The following results taken from the
work of Pearce 1 will show that this conclusion is justified:
TABLE 50. Dissociation from freezing-point lowering and from conductivity.
Salt.
Concen-
tration.
Dissocia-
tion from
freezing-
point
lowering.
Dissocia-
tion from
conduc-
tivity.
Salt.
Concen-
tration.
Dissocia-
tion from
freezing-
point
lowering.
Dissocia-
tion from
conduc-
tivity.
CaCl 2
0.01
89.67
CoCl 2
0.05
90.28
84.80
0.05
85.00
80.62
0.10
87.36
78.85
0.10
80.41
74.35
Mg(N0 3 ) 2
0.02
94.90
85.12
SrCl 2
0.01
91.87
89.37
0.05
84.24
78.80
0.05
82.65
78.10
0.10
81.95
74.78
0.10
81.46
74.17
Ba(N0 3 ) 2
0.01
99.06
86.37
BaCl 2
0.01
97.10
90.90
0.05
75.18
70.47
0.05
90.75
79.80
0.10
62.95
61.36
MgCl 2
0.01
97.10
90.90
Co(N0 3 ) 2
0.01
98.65
92.40
0.05
90.75
79.78
0.05
88.26
81.73
0.10
87.68
73.61
0.10
85.48
76.48
SrCl 2
0.01
91.87
89.37
Ni(NO 3 ) 2
0.01
98.03
91.10
0.05
82.65
78.08
0.05
83.72
79.83
0.10
81.46
74.17
0.075
81.32
76.57
Concentrated solutions were also studied in the above work; but
on account of very large hydration it was impossible to calculate dis-
sociation from the freezing-point results.
An examination of the above table will show that the dissociation
of dilute solutions, as measured by the freezing-point method, is uni-
formly greater than as measured by the conductivity method. This
seems to admit of reasonable explanation in terms of hydration in
aqueous solution.
'Carnegie Inst. Wash., Pub. 180; Amer. Chem. Journ., 39, 313 (1908).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 161
EFFECT OF ONE SALT WITH HYDRATING POWER ON THE HYDRATES FORMED
BY A SECOND SALT IN THE SAME SOLUTION.
The effect of adding a salt with strong hydrating power to a solution
of another strongly hydrated salt was worked out by Jones and Stine. 1
The effect of adding a salt with small hydrating power was also investi-
gated. The following pairs of salts were studied : Calcium chloride and
potassium chloride; magnesium chloride and calcium chloride; stron-
tium chloride and calcium chloride; strontium nitrate and magnesium
nitrate; calcium nitrate and magnesium nitrate; aluminium chloride
and ferric chloride; calcium chloride and calcium nitrate; lithium
bromide and sodium bromide, and ammonium chloride and potassium
chloride, as examples of only slightly hydrated salts.
A large variety of types of salts was used. The first pah- contains a
binary and a ternary electrolyte with a common anion; the one (calcium
chloride) strongly hydrated, the other (potassium chloride) only slightly
hydrated. The next four pairs are all ternary electrolytes and are all
strongly hydrated salts.
Aluminium chloride and ferric chloride are quaternary electrolytes
and strongly hydrated. The two calcium salts contain a common
cation and both are strongly hydrated. The two bromides contain a
common anion and are not strongly hydrated, while the chlorides of
ammonium and potassium are very weakly hydrated compounds.
The problem was obviously a complicated one. It was not a
simple matter to calculate the composition of the hydrates formed by
any one substance when present alone in the solution. It became far
more complex and difficult to calculate the composition of the hydrates
formed when two hydrating substances were present simultaneously
in the solution. We believe, however, that this problem was solved
at least approximately. It was found that the amount of combined
water increases with increase in concentration in the mixed, as in the
separate solutions; the total amount combined with the calcium
chloride being less when the potassium chloride was present. The
difference between the amount of water combined with the calcium
chloride when alone and when potassium chloride is present increases
with the concentrations of the two constituents of the mixture.
We found in general that when two hydrated salts were mixed, each
dehydrated the other to an amount that seemed to be controlled by
mass action. In order that this law should hold, it would seem that
the calculated composition of the hydrates formed by the individual
substances must be approximately correct.
It was early found that both ions and molecules can form hydrates.
That the molecules of certain substances have hydrating power, was
shown by the fact that certain non-electrolytes undoubtedly combine
with water in aqueous solution. Ions were, as a class, found to have
2 Amer. Chem. Journ., 39, 313 (1908).
162 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
much greater hydrating power than molecules. This conclusion was
confirmed by the work of Stine. It was also shown that molecules
in aqueous solution can combine with water, and in special cases
molecules may even have greater hydrating power than some ions.
The work with the slightly hydrated potassium and ammonium
chlorides brought out a significant fact. These were chosen, not to
study the effect of one hydrated salt on the hydration of another
hydrated salt, but to study the effect of change in temperature on the
conductivities of separate solutions of electrolytes and upon mixtures
of these solutions. For this purpose it was necessary to select a pair of
salts with small hydrating power and also which do not form double
salts with one another.
If suppression of ionization were the only cause of the diminution
in conductivity on mixing solutions of salts, such as the above, which
have a common ion, then we should find the greatest dimunition where
the dissociation is greatest. Since dissociation is slightly greater at
than at 12, and slightly greater at 12 than at 25, we should expect
to find greater diminution in the conductivity at than at 12, and
greater at 12 than at 25. Exactly the reverse is true.
Again, as the difference in dissociation between to 12 is but little
greater than between 12 and 25, we should expect to find that between
these two ranges of temperature the driving back of the conductivity
would be of the same order of magnitude, yet such is not the case.
Furthermore, some of the solutions which we mixed are nearly iso-
hydric, and such solutions do not drive back each other's dissociation.
Driving back the dissociation of a salt by the addition of a second salt
with a common ion is, therefore, not the only cause of the diminution
in conductivity which results when salts with a common ion are mixed.
It was pointed out that three other factors may come into play:
(1) Change in hydration giving rise to change in the size and mass of
the ion, which probably plays a very insignificant role in the above-
named case, since the chlorides of ammonium and potassium are only
slightly hydrated. (2) Change in the number of the dissolved parts,
which, however, is not very large for small changes in temperature.
(3) Change in the viscosity of the solution with change in temperature,
which is undoubtedly a very prominent factor, hitherto either over-
looked or not given sufficient prominence in dealing with the phe-
nomenon in question.
INVESTIGATIONS IN MIXED SOLVENTS.
The study of the conductivities and dissociations in pure solvents
was extended here to mixed solvents. This phase of the work has now
been in progress continuously for a dozen years, and the results have
been published in monographs Nos. 80 and 180 of the Carnegie Institu-
tion of Washington.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 163
The first investigation was carried out by Lindsay. 1 He worked
in water, in methyl, ethyl, and propyl alcohols, and in mixtures of
these solvents with one another. He found, in certain mixtures of the
alcohols with water, that the conductivity of the dissolved salt was
less than in the pure alcohol. The conductivity curves in mixtures
of methyl alcohol and water passed through well-defined minima, and
a conductivity minimum was also frequently found in mixtures of
ethyl alcohol and water.
A possible explanation of the results in mixtures of the alcohols with
water is that each solvent diminishes the association of the other.
Since the dissociating power of a solvent is in general greater the larger
its own association, it follows that whatever would decrease the asso-
ciation of a liquid would decrease its power to dissociate electrolytes
dissolved in it. The question is, does one associated liquid diminish
the association of another associated liquid?
An associated liquid tears down the molecules of an electrolyte
dissolved in it, into simpler parts or ions; and it might be expected
that such a liquid would tear down the molecules of another associated
liquid, a non-electrolyte, not into charged parts or ions, but into
simpler molecules. The alcohol and water are associated liquids, as
has been shown by the surface-tension method of Ramsay and Shields. 2
Do these diminish the association of one another?
That this is the case was shown by Murray. 3 He worked with the
associated liquids, water, formic acid, and acetic acid. He determined
the molecular weight of each of these liquids in the other two, and
found that their molecular weights became smaller the more dilute
the solutions. This showed that the solvent, i. e., the liquid present
in the larger quantity, was tearing down the molecular complexes of
the dissolved liquid or the one present in smaller quantity.
That the diminution in the association of one associated liquid by
another associated liquid was true, was shown for the above-named
substances and made highly probable for others.
That this was not the entire explanation of the nature of the con-
ductivity curves in mixtures of certain alcohols with water, was brought
out by the next investigation in this field, carried out here by Carroll. 4
He compared the conductivity curves of electrolytes dissolved in
these solvents, with the fluidity curves of the mixtures of the two liquids
in question, and found that the two sets of curves were very similar.
The minima in the two cases occurred in the same mixture of the two
liquids. A careful comparison of the two sets of phenomena led us
to conclude that the conductivity minima are largely due to the dimin-
ished fluidity which takes place on mixing the two solvents. The
diminished fluidity, or increased viscosity, would cause the ions to
move more slowly, and hence decrease the conductivity.
1 Amer. Chem. Journ., 28, 329 (1902). 3 Amer. Chem. Journ., 30, 193 (1903).
2 Zeit. phys. Chem., 12, 433 (1893). 4 Ibid., 32, 521 (1904).
164 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
At the end of the work done by Carroll, we seemed justified in
concluding that the conductivities of binary electrolytes in such sol-
vents as those already considered, are inversely proportional to the
coefficients of viscosity of the solvent and are directly proportional to
the association of the solvent. Bassett 1 showed that silver nitrate in
mixtures of methyl alcohol and water gave a conductivity minimum
at both and 25 ; also that the effect of one solvent on the other was
greater at than at 25. This would be expected, since the dissocia-
tion diminishes with rise in temperature, and each solvent would
probably diminish the association of the other less, the smaller its own
association or the higher its temperature.
Bingham 2 not only measured the conductivities, but also the viscos-
ities of a number of solvents and solutions in these solvents. He found
minima in the conductivity curves in mixtures of acetone and water.
The distinctly new feature brought out by the work of Bingham was
that lithium and calcium nitrates in mixtures of acetone with methyl
and ethyl alcohols showed a pronounced maximum in the conduc-
tivity curves. This must be due either to an increase in dissociation
in such mixtures, increasing the number of ions present, and conse-
quently increasing the conductivity, or it must be due to a diminution
in the complexity of the solvates around the ions, increasing their
velocities. The dissociation was measured in the mixtures in question
and found not to account for the phenomenon. This eliminates
increase in dissociation and leaves the other alternative, diminution
in the complexity of the solvate, to account for the phenomenon.
The ion must drag with it through the solvent any molecules of the
liquid with which it had combined. This would increase the effective
mass and diminish its velocity. Anything which would diminish the
complexity of the solvate about the ion would increase its velocity,
and consequently the conductivity. We must therefore conclude that
the solvates in those mixtures of acetone with the alcohols are simplest
where the conductivity is the greatest.
Rouiller 3 studied both the velocities of the ions and the conductivities
of electrolytes in mixtures of acetone with the alcohols. Silver nitrate
in methyl alcohol and acetone gave a decided maximum of conduc-
tivity. His work on the velocities of the ions in these mixtures indi-
cated that the above explanation of the maxima offered by Jones
and Bingham was correct; there is a change in the complexity of the
solvate about the ion.
McMaster 4 extended the work in the same solvents used by Bingham
water, methyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol, and acetone and in mixtures
of these with one another. He found conductivity results of the same
general character as those obtained by the earlier workers. Conduc-
r. Chem. Journ., 32, 409 (1904). 3 Ibid., 36, 443 (1906).
*Ibid., 34, 481 (1905). *Ibid., 326 (1906).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 165
tivity minima were found in mixtures of the alcohols with water and
acetone with water. Conductivity maxima were obtained with lithium
bromide in mixtures of methyl or ethyl alcohol with acetone. Cobalt
chloride in mixtures of acetone with ethyl alcohol also showed a maxi-
mum. Jones and McMaster reached the same conclusion from their
work that had been reached by Jones and Bingham. Change in the
complexity of the solvate formed by the ion in different mixtures of
solvents is an important factor in determining the conductivity maxima.
A point of interest brought out by the work of McMaster was in
connection with the temperature coefficients of conductivity in non-
aqueous solutions. The bearing of temperature coefficients of con-
ductivity on the solvate theory of solution has already been discussed.
With rise in temperature the hydrates about the ions became simpler.
The mass and probably the size of the ion thus became less, and it moves
faster the higher the temperature, thus increasing the conductivity.
McMaster found that cobalt chloride in certain mixtures of acetone
with the alcohols showed, at ordinary temperatures, negative temper-
ature coefficients of conductivity. What does this mean? The solvent
becomes less viscous with rise in temperature, thus increasing the
velocity of the ions; and the solvates become simpler, which also
increases the velocity with which the ions move.
With rise in temperature, on the other hand, the association of the
solvent, and consequently its dissociating power, becomes less.
The above two influences work counter to one another. Negative
temperature coefficients of conductivity mean that the latter influence
overcomes the former. The alcohols used and acetone are highly
associated liquids. Rise in temperature diminishes their association
and consequently their dissociating power.
A solution of cobalt chloride in a 75 per cent mixture of acetone with
methyl alcohol, the solution being ^j- normal, had a zero temperature
coefficient of conductivity.
A number of points of interest were brought out by the next investi-
gator, Veazey. 1 He worked with solutions of salts in water, methyl
alcohol, ethyl alcohol, acetone, and in binary mixtures of these solvents
with one another. The minimum in conductivity was found to be a
more general phenomenon than had been supposed from the earlier
work. It had long been known that mixtures of methyl alcohol and
water or ethyl alcohol and water, are more viscous than either of the
pure solvents alone. A rational explanation of this phenomenon was
suggested alcohol and water are strongly associated liquids. When
two associated liquids are mixed each diminishes the association of
the other. The larger molecules are thus broken down into smaller
molecules, which increases the frictional surfaces when these molecules
move over one another as they do in measuring viscosity. The result
'Amer. Chem. Journ., 37, 405 (1907). Zeit. phys. Chem., 61, 641 (1908); 62. 44 (1908).
166 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
would be to increase the viscosity of the mixture over that of either
pure solvent.
Maxima in the conductivity of electrolytes in the mixed solvents
were shown to correspond to maxima in the fluidity of the mixed
solvents. Maxima in fluidity are probably due to an increase in the
size of the molecules of the solvent, due to a combination of one
solvent with the other. This would diminish the viscosity and conse-
quently increase the velocity of the ions, which would increase the
conductivity. This factor must also be taken into account in explain-
ing conductivity maxima.
The temperature coefficients of conductivity in the above-named
mixtures of liquids with water are a maximum in the 25 and 50 per
cent mixtures. These are just about the mixtures in which the sol-
vents have the least association. The molecules of the solvents being
in the simplest condition, would be most favorable for chemical action.
In such mixtures the solvents probably combine to the greatest extent
with the dissolved substance the solvation is at a maximum. The
effect of rise in temperature breaking down these solvates would there-
fore be a maximum where solvation is a maximum. Solutions of
potassium sulphocyanate have greater conductivity in acetone than
in water. This was shown to be due to the greater fluidity of the
acetone.
This same salt when dissolved in water lowers the viscosity of the
water. An examination of the literature showed that certain salts of
potassium and salts of rubidium and caesium are practically the only
ones known to lower the viscosity of water. In the case of certain
salts of potassium the positive effect of the anion on the viscosity of
water may more than offset the negative effect of the potassium ion.
The following explanation of the above-named phenomenon was
suggested. If the atomic volume of the ions dissolved in the solvent
was larger than the molecular volume of the solvent, the larger ions
would diminish the size of the frictional surfaces coming in contact
and would lower the viscosity.
It is w T ell known that potassium, rubidium, and csesium occupy the
maxima on the atomic-volume curve, and have much larger atomic
volumes than any other known elements. Potassium has a smaller
atomic volume than rubidium, and rubidium than caesium. Potassium
chloride lowers the viscosity of water less than rubidium chloride, and
rubidium chloride less than caesium chloride.
If we study the salts which raise the viscosity of water, we will find,
in general, that the amount of increase in the viscosity bears a relation
to the atomic or ionic volumes of the dissolved substances. Smaller
ions tend to increase the viscosity of water more than larger ones. It
would therefore seem that the above explanation contains a large
element of truth.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 167
The work already discussed in mixed solvents is all recorded in
Publication No. 80 of the Carnegie Institution of Washington. The
results of the following five investigations are recorded in Publication
No. 180 of the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
The problem of measuring dissociation in non-aqueous solvents is
a difficult one. The freezing-point method is frequently not applicable.
Many common solvents, such as the alcohols, freeze at temperatures
which are too widely removed from the ordinary temperature of the
laboratory to measure with sufficient accuracy. The boiling-point
method could be used only with fairly concentrated solutions. Dilute
solutions produce such a slight rise in the boiling-point that this small
quantity can not be measured with a very high degree of accuracy.
The boiling-point method has the further disadvantage of being so
largely affected by slight changes in the barometer.
The hope of measuring conductivity in non-aqueous solvents in
general seemed to rest in the conductivity method. This method as
ordinarily applied would not be satisfactory. The dilution at which
complete dissociation would be reached in such solvents is so great
that the Kohlrausch method in any such form as he left it could not
be applied to the problem.
The conductivity method was greatly improved by Kreider; 1 the
greatest improvement being in the form of cell employed. With the
improved method Kreider studied the dissociations of a number of
salts in methyl and ethyl alcohols and in mixtures of these solvents
with water. He measured the conductivities of solutions as dilute
as 100,000 liters.
uoo methyl alcohol
He found the following relation: 77 j j ITT~ = constant.
When a salt is dissociated in each of two solvents, for the same con-
centration of the salt there are the same number of ions in the two
solutions. Conductivity is a function of the number of the ions and
their velocities. When numbers of the ions are constant, as in this
case, conductivity is a function of the relative velocities of the ions.
The velocity of an ion is conditioned by its mass and volume and by
the fluidity of the solvent. If the masses and volumes of the ions in
the two solvents are constant, the velocities of the ions should vary
as the fluidities of the solvents. The ratio between the values of ^
in the two solvents should be the same as the ratio between the fluidities
of these solvents. This was, however, found not to be the case. The
bearing of this fact on the condition of the ions in the two solvents in
question is important. This shows that the mass and probably the
volume of the solvated ion must differ in the two solvents.
The ratio between the values of //, for a salt in the two solvents,
compared with the ratio between the fluidities of the two solvents,
'Amer. Chem. Journ., 45, 282 (1911).
168 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
would give an approximate idea of the relative solvation of the ions
in the two solvents in question.
This method will be still further applied to the problem of solvation
in non-aqueous solvents.
Mahin 1 studied electrolytes in ternary mixtures of the alcohol with
water, and obtained results of the same general character as those
found in binary mixtures of these solvents. He then took up work in
binary mixtures, one constituent being acetone. Acetone was studied
primarily because it is an exceptional solvent in many of its properties.
Substances dissolved in acetone are largely polymerized, and acetone
has at the same time considerable dissociating power. Furthermore,
acetone is a solvent with small viscosity, and it was desired to see
whether the relations found for solvents with larger viscosity would
hold here. The curve for conductivity and for fluidity were worked
out and the two compared.
It was found that the product of molecular conductivity and vis-
cosity is nearly a constant at complete dissociation. This means that
for completely dissociated solutions in acetone the curves of molecular
conductivity are similar to those of fluidity conductivity being in-
versely proportional to viscosity. This relation is of interest in that
it holds in a solvent with such small viscosity as acetone.
Relations such as those referred to above having been found to hold
in a solvent with such small viscosity as acetone, the question arose,
do such relations obtain in a highly viscous solvent like glycerol?
Glycerol not only has a very high viscosity, but is an excellent solvent,
and has a large dielectric constant, which means that it has consider-
able dissociating power. Glycerol is fairly strongly associated, which
also indicates considerable dissociating power.
The first investigation in glycerol as a solvent was carried out by
Schmidt. 2 He measured the conductivities of solutions of certain
salts in glycerol, and in mixtures of glycerol with water and with methyl
and ethyl alcohols. The conductivities were measured at different
temperatures. The most striking relation noted was the enormous
magnitude of the temperature coefficients of conductivity of electro-
lytes dissolved in glycerol. This was shown to be due to the rapid
decrease in the viscosity of glycerol with rise in temperature.
It was shown that where glycerol is mixed with water or the alcohols,
there is a breaking down of the association of each solvent by the other,
and a consequent diminution in the dissociating power. Solutions of
potassium iodide in 25 and 50 per cent mixtures of glycerol and water
lowered the viscosity of these solvents. This salt does not lower the
viscosity of glycerol, but of the mixtures. The meaning of negative
viscosity effects was discussed in the work of Veazey. While Schmidt
did not study any salt which lowers the viscosity of pure glycerol, he
iAmer. Chem. Journ., 41, 433 (1909) ; Zeit. phys. Chem., 69, 389 (1909).
2 Amer. Chem. Journ., 42, 37 (1909).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 169
found that the effect of the salt on the viscosity of pure glycerol was
inversely as the molecular volume or atomic volumes of the constitu-
ents of the salt. This was in keeping with the explanation offered by
Jones and Veazey to account for the changes in the viscosity of the
solvent by the dissolved substance. A comparison of the conduc-
tivity and fluidity curves shows that the two run nearly parallel.
Although glycerol has about 1,000 times the viscosity of methyl alcohol,
yet, from the work of Schmidt, the same general relations obtain here
that hold for the far less viscous solvents.
The work of Schmidt was continued by Guy. 1 He worked with a
much larger number of salts, and over the temperature range 25 to
75. He studied not only solutions in glycerol, but in mixtures of
glycerol with water, with methyl, and with ethyl alcohols.
Guy found also enormous temperature coefficients of conductivity.
This may be due to either of two causes : a change in dissociation with
rise in temperature, or a change in the velocity of the ions. We know
the order of magnitude of the change in dissociation with rise in tem-
perature, and it is small. The chief cause of the large temperature
coefficients of conductivity in glycerol is, then, an increase in the
velocities with which the ions move. As we have seen, this may be
due to a decrease in the viscosity of the solvent with rise in temperature,
or may be caused by a breaking down of complex solvates about the ions.
While the viscosity of glycerol increases rapidly with rise in tem-
perature, this alone would not account for the magnitude of the temper-
ature coefficients of conductivity of glycerol solutions. There seems
to be good evidence for the formation of glycerolates in solutions in
glycerol. The temperature coefficients of conductivity in glycerol are
greater at high than at low dilution. Jones has pointed out that this
would be expected from the solvate theory. The more dilute the
solution the more complex the solvate; the more complex the solvate
the greater the change in its complexity with rise in temperature.
Further, salts of calcium, strontium, and barium have larger tem-
perature coefficients of conductivity than those of sodium, potassium,
and ammonium. The former are strongly hydrated, the latter weakly
hydrated substances. It would seem that the former are more strongly
glycerolated than the latter. Salts which have approximately the
same hydrating power have temperature coefficients of conductivity
in glycerol of the same order of magnitude, indicating the same order
of magnitude of glycerolation. Work in the mixed solvents indicates
that water diminishes the association of glycerol.
Solutions of salts in glycerol have in general greater viscosity than
pure glycerol. Guy, however, found marked exceptions to this rela-
tion. Salts of rubidium lowered the viscosity of glycerol. Ammonium
bromide and iodide also lowered the viscosity of this solvent. That
. Chem. Journ., 46, 131 (1911).
170 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
rubidium should lower the viscosity of glycerol is in keeping with
what was found in aqueous solutions. Salts of rubidium and caesium
and some salts of potassium lowered the viscosity of water. This has
already been explained as due to the large atomic volumes of these
elements. The same explanation holds for solutions in glycerol.
Davis 1 continued the work of Guy, studying especially the effect
of salts on the viscosity of glycerol. He repeated the work with
ammonium iodide and obtained the same result that had been earlier
found by Guy. He studied rubidium chloride, bromide, iodide, and
nitrate, and showed that these lowered the viscosity of glycerol. The
rubidium salts lower the viscosity of glycerol to such an extent that
they appreciably increase their own conductivity in this solvent.
Comparing the effects of the chloride, bromide, and iodide of rubid-
ium on the viscosity of glycerol, Davis found that the chloride has the
least effect, the bromide next, the iodide the greatest. He showed that
this was in the same order as the molecular volumes of the salts in
question. The results obtained with glycerol were, then, analogous to
those obtained with water, both with respect to viscosity and solution.
SPECTROSCOPIC EVIDENCE BEARING ON THE SOLVATE THEORY OF SOLUTION.
WORK OF JONES AND UHLER.
Work on the absorption spectra of solutions has now been in progress
in my laboratory continuously for eight years. This work was under-
taken in connection with its bearing on the solvate theory of solution.
What connection is there between solvation and the power of solu-
tions to absorb light?
It is well known that absorption of light means that the wave-
lengths of light set something vibrating with periods the same as their
own. Selective absorption of light or the absorption of certain wave-
lengths of light means that the wave-lengths absorbed set something
vibrating with their own periods. Absorption of light is, then, a
resonance phenomenon. Absorption of light by a dissolved substance
means that something in the solution must be thrown into resonance
with the light must be set vibrating with the same periods as the
light-waves. Many dissolved substances absorb only certain wave-
lengths. This means that those particular wave-lengths of light find
something in the solution which they can set vibrating with their own
periods. Transparency means lack of resonance, opacity means reso-
nance. The color of any given solution is determined by the wave-
lengths of light which are not absorbed. A red solution is one which
allows the long wave-lengths to pass through. A blue solution is one
which allows the short wave-lengths to pass through. That particle
in solution which is thrown into resonance by the light is called the
*Zeit. phys. Chem., 81, 68 (1912).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 171
resonator. This was formerly supposed to be the molecule or the ion,
but is now thought to be the electron. Whatever the nature of the
resonator, the absorption of light by dissolved substance is due to it.
The line of thought which led us to take up the study of the absorp-
tion spectra of solutions in connection with the solvate theory of
solution is the following: The absorption of light being due to a
resonator, this would have different resonance when anhydrous than
when combined with molecules of the solvent. In general, the reso-
nance would be different when the resonator was unsolvated than
when it was solvated. The color of the solution being due to the
resonator, the solution could reasonably be expected to have different
color when the resonator was solvated than when it was unsolvated.
The study of the color of solutions, and the changes in the color when
the resonator underwent changes in solvation, might give some clue
to the changes in solvation.
It is a comparatively simple matter to change solvation in solution;
it is only necessary to change the concentration of the solution. The
more dilute the solution the more complex the solvates formed. We shall
see that this often produces a marked change in the absorption spectra.
We can diminish the complexity of the solvates by raising the temper-
ature. This also frequently produces marked changes in the absorption.
Addition of a dehydrating agent will change the hydration of any given
salt. This frequently changes the absorption spectra and the color of a
solution ; and there are many other ways of changing solvation. These
frequently produce concomitant changes in the absorption spectra.
A salt dissolved in water may form hydrates, in alcohol alcoholates,
in acetone acetonates, in glycerol glycerolates, etc. We should expect
these different solvates to affect the resonator or resonators differently.
We shall see that this is true.
With this idea in mind, work was begun in my laboratory on the
study of the absorption spectra of solutions. The first investigation
was carried out by Dr. Uhler and myself. Our work consisted largely
in devising a method and apparatus for studying the property of
solutions to absorb light. The key to the method consisted in using
a grating instead of a prism spectroscope. This gave much greater
dispersion, and brought out many new lines and bands. A form of
cell was devised for holding solutions in non-aqueous solvents which
avoided the use of all cement. The details of this phase of the work
are all given in Publication No. 60 of the Carnegie Institution of
Washington. We studied the effect on the absorption spectra of
increasing the concentration of the solution, and found that, in general,
the effect of increasing the concentration of the solution was to widen
the absorption bands. As the solvates became simpler the absorption
bands became broader.
Another method of simplifying the hydrates existing in an aqueous
solution was to add a dehydrating agent in the form of a second salt.
172 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
It was found that this also produced a widening of the absorption
bands. This was in keeping with the effect of increasing the concen-
tration of the solution, which also simplified the hydrates.
Jones and Uhler also studied the effect of adding water to solutions
in non-aqueous solvents. Thus, water was added to solutions in
methyl and ethyl alcohols, acetone, etc. The effect of adding water
was to narrow the absorption bands. All of these results were regarded
as in keeping with the solvate theory of solution.
WORK OF JONES AND ANDERSON.
The work of Jones and Uhler on the absorption spectra of solutions
was greatly extended in a number of directions by Jones and Anderson. 1
They worked with salts of cobalt, nickel, copper, iron, chromium, neo-
dymium, praseodymium, and erbium. Only that phase of the work will
be discussed here which bears on the solvate theory of solution.
We will first consider the results with salts of cobalt. There is a
region of one-sided absorption in the ultra-violet. This band narrows
with dilution, but remains of approximately constant width when the
number of molecules in the path of the beam of light is kept constant,
indicating that the absorbers here are the undissociated molecules.
The band X3300 disappears rapidly with increase in the dilution of
the solution, even when the number of molecules in the path of the
beam of light is kept constant. This band increases rapidly in intensity
with rise in temperature, and can be accounted for best by assuming
that it is due to a relatively simple hydrate. It is well known that
rise in temperature breaks down complex hydrates into simpler ones,
which would give rise to the band; and, further, increase in dilution
produces more and more complex hydrates. These would cause the
disappearance of a band due to simpler hydrates.
The green cobalt band can not be due to the cobalt ions, since it is
not most intense where the number of cobalt ions is the greatest. The
width of this band does not vary, if the light is passed through such
depths of the solution that the product of the concentration multiplied
by the depth is kept constant. This would indicate that this band
is due to the cobalt atom, whether combined as in the molecule or
dissociated as an ion.
The absorption in the red is characteristic of concentrated solutions
alone. This would show that it is not due to the cobalt ion. We
might suppose that it was due to aggregates of molecules; but this
view is not tenable, since the absorption in the red increases with rise
in temperature, which breaks down such aggregates. High tempera-
ture and great concentration favor the formation of simple hydrates
and also increase the absorption in the red. The red absorption can
therefore be accounted for as due to simple hydrates in solution.
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 110; Amer. Chem. Journ., 41, 163 (1909).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 173
Jones and Anderson also did some work on the absorption spectra of
cobalt salts in certain non-aqueous solvents. The green band appeared
in all of the non-aqueous solutions studied. This is just what would
be expected if this band is due to the cobalt atom. The intensity of
this band in non-aqueous solvents was found to be proportional to
the concentration.
The red absorption is more intense in the non-aqueous solvents
than in water, the intensity increasing from methyl alcohol to ethyl
alcohol to acetone. With increase in the dilution the band narrows
rapidly in methyl alcohol, more slowly in ethyl alcohol, and remains
nearly constant in acetone. All of these facts are in accord with the
view that this band is due to simple solvates. We should expect the
power to form solvates to be greater for methyl alcohol than for ethyl alco-
hol, and greater for ethyl alcohol than for acetone. In ethyl alcohol
and acetone at ordinary temperatures most of the solvates are probably
simple enough to absorb in the red, while in methyl alcohol this is
the case only at elevated temperatures or in concentrated solutions.
The nickel absorption bands are similar in their behavior to the
green band of cobalt. The absorption of nickel salts seems to be
largely a function of the nickel atom. The widening of the band
X 3960, with concentration and with hydrating agents, indicates that
the simplest hydrates have a somewhat different absorption from the
more complex. The ultra-violet absorption of copper salts decreases
rapidly with dilution, when we keep the product of depth of layer and
concentration constant. This would indicate that this absorption is
not due to the ions, but must be due in some way to the molecules.
The absorption decreases with the dilution, even when the molecules
in the path of the light are kept constant. This would indicate that
the absorbing power of molecules is affected by the surroundings.
The increase in the absorption with concentration when the mole-
cules are kept constant might be due to the formation of molecular
aggregates or might be due to solvates. To decide between these two
alternatives we must take into account the effect of rise in tempera-
ture on the absorption. Rise in temperature increases the absorption,
but rise in temperature breaks down the molecular aggregates. There-
fore, this absorption can not be due to aggregates. Solvates become
simpler both by rise in temperature and by increase in the concentra-
tion of the solution. Both should produce the same effect on the
absorption if this absorption is due to simple solvates, and such is the
fact. We must therefore conclude that the ultra-violet absorption of
copper salts is due to simpler hydrates.
For equal concentration the ultra-violet absorption of copper salts
is least in the aqueous solutions, and increases as we pass from methyl
to ethyl alcohol. Further, the change in this absorption with dilution
is greatest for the aqueous solutions, and decreases as we pass to methyl
174 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
and ethyl alcohols. These facts are just what would be expected if
this absorption was due to simpler solvates, since the power to form
solvates is greater for water than for either of the alcohols, and greater for
methyl than for ethyl alcohol. For equal concentrations the solvates
would decrease in complexity as we pass from water to methyl alcohol.
Further, increase in dilution would change the complexity of the sol-
vates more in aqueous solutions than in solutions in either of the alcohols.
The above conclusion is, then, in perfect accord with all of the facts.
The absorption of copper salts in the red narrows when the product
of concentration and depth of absorbing layer is kept constant, but
widens when the molecules are kept constant. Its intensity varies
far more with change in concentration than with change in solvent.
This absorption must be due to the atom, and is affected comparatively
slightly by the surroundings of the atom. The copper absorption in
the red is, then, less affected by solvates than the absorption by copper
in the ultra-violet. The feature of the work of Jones and Anderson,
which bears most directly on the solvate theory of solution, came out
as the result of studying the absorption spectra of solutions of salts
of neodymium and praseodymium, and especially of neodymium.
Neodymium chloride was found to have quite different absorption
in water from what it had in methyl alcohol. This made it desirable
to study the absorption spectrum of this salt in mixtures of methyl
alcohol and water. By changing the composition of the mixtures of
the two solvents, we could see how the spectra corresponding to the
two solvents would change.
It was found that when the proper mixture of alcohol and water
was used, the two spectra (the one corresponding to the alcoholic
solution and the other to the aqueous solution) coexisted on the plate.
When the amount of water in the mixed solvents increased, the "water
spectrum" came out more strongly; when the amount of alcohol
present was increased, the " alcohol spectrum" came out more strongly.
When the amount of water present exceeds 15 or 20 per cent, we have
only the " water spectrum." As the amount of water is still further
decreased by the addition of more alcohol, the spectrum consists of
the "water spectrum" and the "alcohol spectrum" superposed. As
the amount of water is diminished below 15 per cent, the intensity of
the water spectrum becomes less and less and the intensity of the
alcohol spectrum greater and greater.
A question of importance in the present connection is this : Does the
"water spectrum" gradually change over into the alcohol spectrum"
as the amount of alcohol present is increased, or do we have here two
separate and distinct spectra, the one corresponding to the aqueous
solution, and the other to the alcoholic?
To test this point, we worked with fairly dilute solutions of neody-
mium chloride in water, in methyl alcohol, and in mixtures of water
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 175
and methyl alcohol. The object in using dilute solutions was to be
able to study the structure of the bands in the different solvents. In
the more dilute solutions the several parts of any given band would
come out clearly and could be measured. The result was to show
that the " alcohol spectrum" was quite different from the "water
spectrum." It had different components and they were arranged in
a different way within the bands.
In mixed solvents, then, the two spectra coexisted, and we did not
have the one passing over into the other as we changed the composi-
tion of the mixture of alcohol and water. The "water" spectrum and
"methyl alcohol" spectrum had equal intensities when the mixture of
the water and methyl alcohol contained from 6 to 8 per cent of water.
Neodymium nitrate shows change in the spectra analogous to those
manifested by the chloride, when dissolved in mixtures of water and
one of the non-aqueous solvents. The change with the nitrate is not
so striking as with the chloride.
Praseodymium chloride in mixtures of water and methyl alcohol
shows the same general features as were manifested by the chloride
of neodymium. In the case of praseodymium chloride there is this
additional feature: in the alcoholic solution an entirely new band
appears, having no analogue in the aqueous solutions. This new band
in the ultra-violet is by far the most intense in the entire spectrum
of praseodymium chloride. On adding water to the alcoholic solution
this band entirely disappears. In this case the alcohol spectrum is
quite different from the water spectrum.
These results show beyond question that the solvent plays an impor-
tant role in the absorption of light by solutions. The question arises,
what is this role? It is difficult, not to say impossible, to explain the
action of the solvent on any other ground than that a part of the solvent
combines with the ions and molecules of the dissolved substance, and
the solvated parts have different resonance from the unsolvated. This
means that they would absorb different wave-lengths of light. The
alcoholates would have different resonance from the hydrates, whence
the different absorption spectrum in alcohol from that in water.
We regard this evidence in favor of solvation in solution as important,
and, as we shall see, many examples of "solvent" bands were brought
to light in the investigation which followed.
WORK OF JONES AND STRONG.
The work of Jones and Anderson was continued by Jones and
Strong. 1 They investigated a number of problems, including the effect
of the solvent on the absorption of light by the dissolved substance.
Jones and Anderson, as we have just seen, had found one good example
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pubs. Nos. 130 and 160. Amer. Chim. Journ.,43, 37, 224 (1910); 45, 1
(1910) ; 47, 27 (1912). Phys. Zeit. 10, 499 (1909). Phil. Mag., April, 1910. Journ. Chim. Phys.,
8, 131 (1910).
176 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
of the existence of "solvent bands" in the absorption spectra of neo-
dymium and praseodymium salts in water and the alcohols. The
question arose, was this a phenomenon peculiar to these salts, or does
the solvent play a general role in the absorption of light by solutions?
Jones and Strong attempted to answer this question by studying a
large number of salts in a large number of solvents. They worked
especially with salts of neodymium and uranium, because these sub-
stances had sharp absorption lines and bands whose positions could
easily be determined with reasonable accuracy. Work was done not
only with uranyl salts, but with uranous. A convenient method was
found for reducing uranyl salts to the uranous condition, and uranous
salts were found to have very sharp absorption lines.
Uranyl chloride was studied in the following solvents : water, methyl,
ethyl, propyl, isopropyl, butyl, and isobutyl alcohols, glycerol, ether,
methyl ester, and formamide. A comparison of the wave-lengths of
the absorption lines and bands in these different solvents brought out
the fact that the wave-lengths of some of the lines and bands differed
considerably in the different solvents. The results here showed that
the solvent unquestionably has much to do with the absorbing power
of the solution, "solvent bands" appearing very frequently. The
wave-lengths of a few of the different lines and bands of uranyl chloride
in the above-named solvents have been tabulated, 1 and the table is
here reproduced. It shows at a glance the different wave-lengths of
the several lines and bands compared.
TABLE 51. Wave-lengths of uranyl chloride absorption lines.
In water XX 4025, 4170, 4315, 4460, 4560, 4740, and 4920
In methyl alcohol... XX 4090, 4220, 4345, 4465, 4590, 4760, and 4930
In ethyl alcohol
In propyl alcohol
In isopropyl alcohol. .
In butyl alcohol
In isobutyl alcohol.
XX 4100, 4250 4400, 4580, 4750, and 4900
XX 4100, 4230 4400, 4580, 4750, and 4910
XX 4100, 4250 4360, 4560, 4750
XX 4100, 4240, 4390, 4560, 4750, and 4970
XX 4400, 4560, 4720, and 4900
In ether XX 4040, 4160, 4300, 4444, and 4630
In methyl ester XX 4030, 4160, 4280, 4440, 4620, 4790, and 4920
In glycerol XX 4025, 4140, 4260, 4400, 4540, 4720, and 5050
In formamide XX 4450, 4650 and 4840
The absorption spectra of uranyl nitrate in mixtures of water and
methyl alcohol were studied. The absorption in water was much less
than in pure methyl alcohol. The addition of water to the alcoholic
solution diminished the absorption. In the mixtures of water and
methyl alcohol the absorption bands became very broad. A study
of these broadened bands showed that they were the "alcohol" and
"water" bands coexisting, and that one set of bands was not simply
the other set shifted in position. The importance of this fact has
already been referred to in the work of Jones and Anderson. It shows
that the "alcohol" bands are fundamentally different from the "water"
Uourn. Franklin Inst., Dec. 1913, p. 528; also Phil. Mag., May 1912, p. 730.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 177
bands. Further, the intensity of the solvent bands is a function of
the relative amounts of the solvents that are present in the mixture.
This, as has been pointed out, indicates the existence of hydrates in
the aqueous solutions and of alcoholates in solutions in alcohol, these
solvates having definite resonance and, therefore, definite absorption
spectra.
One of the most striking examples of solvent bands is shown by the
absorption spectra of uranous chloride and bromide in a mixture of
water and methyl alcohol. We find two entirely distinct spectra, one
belonging to each solvent. Some lines and bands appear in the one sol-
vent which are entirely absent from the other, and practically all the
lines and bands have very different positions in the two solvents. To
see how differently the spectra appear, reference must be made to plate
23 of Publication No. 160 of the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
The spectrum of uranous chloride in water is not only different from
the spectrum in methyl alcohol, but these are both different from the
spectrum in acetone. If we compare the spectra of this salt in the
three solvents, we might easily conclude that we were dealing with
three fundamentally different spectra, and the only change is in the
nature of the solvent.
Uranous salts in solvents other than the above also show very
characteristic " solvent" bands. When ethyl alcohol is added to an
aqueous solution of uranous chloride, a marked change is produced
in the spectrum. The "ethyl alcohol" bands are quite different
from the "water" bands. The alcohol bands, or the water bands,
can be made the more intense by simply varying the relative propor-
tions of the two solvents. The addition of acetone to an aqueous
or methyl alcohol solution of uranous chloride produces a marked
change in the spectra. A number of acetone bands appear, these
being different from the "water" bands on the one hand, and from
the "alcohol" bands on the other.
Uranous chloride dissolved in methyl alcohol has an absorption
spectrum very similar to that in ethyl alcohol. This would be expected,
on account of the close similarity of methyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol.
The methyl alcohol bands are of slightly shorter wave-lengths.
The absorption spectra of uranous chloride in glycerol, and in mix-
tures of glycerol and water were also studied. A number of " glycerol "
bands manifested themselves, the glycerol absorption being very dif-
ferent from that of water.
The absorption spectrum of uranous chloride in methyl alcohol and
ether was also studied. The solution in methyl alcohol showed com-
plete absorption in the ultra-violet to wave-length X 3700, while the
addition of ether extended the absorption to X 3800. The addition
of the ether caused the absorption to shift towards the red, the magni-
tude of this shift being from 10 to 30 A. u.
178 DISCUSSION OP EVIDENCE.
It has already been pointed out that salts of neodymium are espe-
cially well adapted to the study of "solvent" bands, on account of the
sharpness of the neodymium lines and bands, and the accuracy with
which they can be measured. Neodymium salts were studied in a
number of solvents, and a few of the results obtained are given below. 1
ABSORPTION SPECTRA OF NEODYMIUM SALTS.
The following nomenclature will be used in describing the neodym-
ium absorption spectra:
a group in the region X3400 to X3600.
|8 " at about X4300.
7 " from X4600 to X4800.
5 " from X5000 to X5400.
"in the region X5800.
In designating the neodymium spectra we start from the violet end
of the spectrum. This is the natural method when a grating is used.
It is doubtful whether, in the near future, the ultra-violet spectrum
of neodymium can be studied much farther than we have done, so that
this is the natural end of the spectrum at which to begin. It is, on
the other hand, probable that there are many neodymium bands
farther down in the infra-red than we have gone; and when these have
been worked out they can then be named in the natural order.
The change in the absorption spectrum of neodymium chloride as
the solvent is changed can best be seen by expressing the results in
the following form: The abbreviations used are "d. " diffuse, "fa."
faint, "fi." fine, "h." hazy, "i." intense, "n." narrow, "sh."sharp, "st."
strong, "we." weak, "wi." wide.
The following results obtained with neodymium chloride show the
effect of the solvent on the absorption spectra of solutions of this
compound. The bands of the different solvents have different wave-
lengths and different relative intensities.
Having found that the solvent played an important part in deter-
mining the absorption of light by the dissolved substances, Jones and
Strong used isomeric organic solvents, to see whether such closely related
compounds would affect differently the power of substances dissolved
in them to absorb light. They prepared solutions of neodymium
chloride in propyl and isopropyl alcohols, and in butyl and isobutyl
alcohols, and photographed the absorption spectra of this salt in these
isomeric solvents. The results show different absorption lines and
bands in the isomeric solvents.
If we compare carefully the spectra of neodymium chloride in butyl
and isobutyl alcohols, we find that the bands are weak and diffuse
in isobutyl alcohol, and have different relative intensities from what
they have in the butyl alcohol. The bands in butyl alcohol are very
1 See Phil. Mag. May 1912, p. 737, from which the few following pages are taken; also, Journ.
Franklin Inst. Dec. 1913, p. 531.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
179
TABLE 52. Absorption spectra ofneodymium chloride in certain solvents,
a GROUP.
In water.
In methyl
and ethyl
alcohols.
In propyl
alcohol.
In
isopropyl
alcohol.
In butyl
alcohol.
In isobutyl
alcohol.
In
glycerol.
XX
3390 we.
3465 n. st.
3505 n. st.
3540 n. st.
3560
XX
3475 fa.
3505
3560 wi.i.
XX
3545 sh.
3460
3490
3510 we.
3525 st
XX
3460
3510
3535
XX
3450 sh. n.
3460 we.
3492 d.
3535 sh. n.
3545
XX
3455 we.
3485 st.
3515 we.
3545
3570
XX
3520 we.
3475 st.
3550 st.
3540 st. n.
3560 d
3560 we.
3580 we.
GROUP.
4271 sh.
4290 n. we.
4290
4325
4270 we.
4285
4265
4265
4285
4300 we.
4288 sh.
4270 fi
4330 wi we
4300
4305 fi
4450 wi. we.
-/ GROUP.
4610 h.
4700
4600 we. d.
4600 d
4700
4620
4645 we.
4685
4780
4825
4700
4770
4690
4730
4730
4780
4710
4730
4755 sh.
4830
4830
4760
4820 wi.
4880 we.
4790
4840
6 GROUP.
5090 n.
5125 wi. h.
5205 i. n.
5222 i n
5125 h.
5180 h. fa.
5220 i. n.
5245 i
5130 wi. d.
5180 wi. d.
5220
5230
5100 wi. d.
5320 wi. d.
5085 n.
5095 n. we.
5130
5200
5150
5260
5215
5230
5120 wi. h.
5170 n.
5190 n.
5230
5255 n
5290 n
5250
5215
5250
5240
5315 fa h
5315 fa
5290
5240
5300
5250
5330 we.
5270
5300
5270 we.
e GROUP.
5725 n. st.
5745 st.
5765 st,
5795
5725 h.
5765 n.
5800 st.
58351.
5860 h.
5895 fa.
5740
5780
5810
5850
5720 d.
5780
5810
5750
5780
5820
5860
5900
5930
5740 we.
5810 st,
5850 st.
5890
5920
5950 we.
5995 we.
5740 h.
5790
5805
5820
5850
6920 we.
180 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
much finer and sharper than they are in isobutyl alcohol. Further,
the bands of neodymium chloride in isobutyl alcohol have slightly
greater wave-lengths than in butyl alcohol.
To eliminate the possibility of the effect of the solvent on absorption
spectra being due to anything inherent in the nature of neodymium
chloride, the nitrate of neodymium was studied in the same way as
the chloride.
The absorption spectra of neodymium nitrate in water, in methyl
alcohol, in ethyl alcohol, in mixtures of these alcohols and water, in
propyl and isopropyl alcohols, in butyl and isobutyl alcohols, in acetone
and in mixtures of acetone and water, in ethyl ester and in formamide,
were carefully photographed and studied. Results are given below in
the case of neodymium nitrate only for the a bands.
a Bands.
In water. Practically the same as the bands of neodymium chloride, but
the bands of the nitrate are broader and hazier than those of the chloride.
In methyl and ethyl alcohols. There are only two bands in the a group,
X 3465 and X 3545.
In propyl alcohol -XX 3455, 3500, and 3585.
In isopropyl akohol.\\ 3460, 3505, and 3535.
In butyl alcohol \\ 3450, 3500, and 3540.
In isobutyl alcohol. Ultraviolet absorption was so great that on the plate
taken the a group did not appear. The absorption in general is the same as
that of the chloride in this alcohol.
In acetone. \\ 3475, and 3555.
In ethyl ester \\ 3455, 3500, and 3540.
The other groups of absorption bands of neodymium nitrate in the
different solvents show differences in the wave-lengths comparable with
the above; but these results suffice to show the effect of the solvent
on the power of neodymium nitrate to absorb light.
The above is strong evidence that the solvent plays an important
part in the absorption of light by substances dissolved in it. When we
take into account the number of salts studied and the number of
solvents employed, the evidence is little short of proof. The only
reasonable question is, How are we to interpret these facts? Before
attempting to answer this question we should take into account also
the following fact : A salt dissolved in a given solvent is characterized
by a definite absorption spectrum. When a salt is dissolved in mix-
tures of varying proportions of two solvents, only two definite absorption
spectra appear, one being characteristic of each solvent. One spectrum
does not gradually change into the other as the composition of the mixed
solvent changes, but only the relative intensities of the two spectra
vary. Starting with that mixture of the two solvents in which both
of the spectra are equally intense, if we diminish the amount of a
relative to b, the spectrum corresponding to a becomes feebler and
feebler, and the spectrum corresponding to b more and more intense.
DISCUSSION OP EVIDENCE. 181
This fact was first noted by Jones and Anderson, and since repeatedly
confirmed by the work of Jones and Strong. We found that when
neodymium chloride was dissolved in a mixture of methyl alcohol and
water, it showed a definite set of "water" bands and a definite set of
"methyl alcohol" bands. As the amount of water in the solution
was decreased relative to the alcohol, the "water" bands decreased
in intensity but remained in the same position. As the amount of
alcohol in the solution was decreased relative to the water, the "alcohol "
bands decreased in intensity, but their position remained unchanged.
Jones and Anderson interpreted these facts as strong evidence in
favor of the view that there are definite hydrates and definite alco-
holates in the solution.
The spectroscopic evidence for solvation in solution furnished by
Jones and Anderson has, as has already been stated, been increased
many fold by the work of Jones and Strong. A large number of
solvents and a fairly large number of salts have been used, and the
existence of solvent bands in general has been established.
The question of the relative stability of the different solvates with
respect to various physical and chemical agents has been studied at
length by Jones and Strong by means of absorption lines and bands.
It would lead us beyond the scope of this paper to discuss these results
in detail. Suffice it to say that the hydrates in general are the most
persistent of all the solvates, although this depends upon the conditions
to which the solution is subjected.
Taking all of the spectroscopic work into account, I regard the evi-
dence from this source as strongly supporting the solvate theory of
solution as advanced by myself about fifteen years ago.
EFFECT OF RISE IN TEMPERATURE.
Jones and Strong studied the effect of rise in temperature on the
absorption spectra of solutions. Considerable work had already been
done on the effect of temperature on absorption spectra over the tem-
perature range to 100. This temperature limit could be studied
in open vessels. To work at higher temperatures closed apparatus
must, of course, be used. Such apparatus was devised and used up
to 200 . 1
The general effect of rise in temperature is to increase the color of
the solution of the inorganic salt, the solution becoming less trans-
parent. The deepening of the color is usually due to a widening of
the absorption bands. The widening of the bands with rise in tem-
perature is frequently unsymmetrical.
While the effect of rise in temperature is to cause the long wave-
length bands to increase in intensity, and in some cases to produce
new bands, in some solvents the effect of rise in temperature is to
cause the short wave-length bands to increase in intensity and even
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 130.
182 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
to disappear. If the absorption is sufficiently intense so that each
group of bands appears as a single band, these broad bands may widen
very unsymmetrically towards the red as the temperature is raised.
In pure solvents the bands not only widen with rise in temperature,
but the edges become more diffuse. With mixtures of salts such as
calcium and neodymium chlorides, the bands become weaker with rise
in temperature.
It is interesting to note that the absorption of a salt in mixtures of
two solvents often decreases in intensity with rise in temperature.
The effect of rise in temperature on the different "solvent bands" is
often quite different. Uranous bromide in 40 per cent water and 60
per cent alcohol showed, at ordinary temperatures, the "water" and
1 ' alcohol " bands of equal intensity. When the temperature was raised
to 80 the "water" bands practically disappeared, while the "alcohol"
bands were scarcely widened at all.
While the effect of rise in temperature is to produce a change in the
intensity of the "solvate" bands, it produces very little change in the
wave-lengths of the bands. In some cases, in mixtures of water and
alcohol, the alcohol bands increase in persistency as the temperature
is raised. This is important as showing that the hydrates and alcohol-
ates have different degrees of stability with respect to temperature.
The effect of rise in temperature is, in general, to increase the absorp-
tion in the short wave-lengths.
An interesting question arose in connection with the effect of tem-
perature on the solvates. Does rise in temperature produce a perma-
nent change in the composition of the solvates? It would seem highly
probable that it would not. The composition of any given solvate is
determined by the amount of solvent relative to dissolved substance.
If the complex solvate is rendered simpler by rise in temperature, then,
when the solution cools down the solvate should have its original
complexity the original condition of equilibrium should be restored.
The results from absorption spectra confirm the above conclusion.
When a salt is dissolved in a mixture of two solvents and the solution
heated, there is, as we have seen, a change in the spectra. When the
solution is cooled again the original spectrum is obtained. This shows
that the original solvates are, as we would expect, reformed. This
would seem to have some bearing on the nature of the solvates existing
in solution. The idea that was originally advanced as to the composi-
tion of the hydrates existing in aqueous solution was that a large
number of hydrates existed simultaneously in a given solution, the
composition for any given substance and any given solvent being
determined chiefly by the concentration of the solution, temperature
being constant. In a word, we had simply a condition of equilibrium
for any given substance between the combined and the free water.
This condition of equilibrium would be changed with rise in tempera-
ture, some of the combined water being set free, in accordance with
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 183
the general principle that rise in temperature breaks down aggregates
formed with evolution of heat, and most aggregates are formed with
heat evolution.
If the original temperature is restored, the original conditions of
equilibrium are reestablished and the initial solvates reformed. If
there were only a few definite hydrates in any given aqueous solution,
each of these would probably be stable over a definite range in tem-
perature, and the changes in their composition would probably take
place by jumps. This would produce correspondingly irregular changes
in the absorption spectra, and not the regular transitions which were
noted.
SPECTROPHOTOGRAPHY OF CHEMICAL REACTIONS.
The effect of adding an acid to uranium salts of another acid was
studied at some length. Thus, uranyl nitrate was treated with sul-
phuric, hydrochloric, and acetic acids; uranous and uranyl acetates
with various acids; a number of uranous salts and neodymium acetate
with nitric acid, and so on. The salts and acids were selected so as
to show the greatest spectroscopic changes. The action of nitric acid
on uranous salts is especially interesting.
The spectrophotographs of chemical reactions show that, as the
salt of one acid is transformed into the salt of another acid, the changes
produced in the spectra are gradual. For example, when uranyl
nitrate is transformed into uranyl sulphate, the uranyl nitrate bands
gradually shift into the sulphate position. The details and data
bearing on this point are given in Publication No. 130 of the Carnegie
Institution of Washington. The addition of a large amount of sul-
phuric acid to a small amount of a solution of uranyl nitrate in nitric
acid, showed admirably the gradual shift of the bands from the nitrate
to the sulphate position.
The addition of a small amount of nitric acid to uranous acetate,
does not appreciably oxidize the uranous salt. The uranous bands
are shifted towards the violet.
The gradual shift of the absorption bands as one salt of a metal is
transformed into another salt by the addition of more and more free
acid is very important.
The work done in my laboratory, which, up to the time we are now
discussing had had to do with about 5,000 solutions, had shown that
any given series of absorption bands corresponds to a definite chemical
condition of the dissolved substance. When a salt is treated with
acid, the absorption bands of some of the salts shift gradually over to
the position occupied by the bands corresponding to the new salt of
the metal with the acid in question. In such a case the absorption
bands can be made to occupy any position between the initial and
final positions. It therefore seems probable that, when a salt of one
acid is transformed in this way into a salt of another acid, a series of
184 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
intermediate systems or compounds is formed. These systems are for
the most part too unstable to be isolated, at least by the methods now
at our disposal; but the action of solutions on light makes their exist-
ence highly probable.
Our chemical equations of to-day represent, in general, only the
beginning and end of chemical relations. They tell us little or nothing
about the intermediate stages of chemical reactions, and these are the
most interesting phases of the reaction. From our spectroscopic work
we are forced to conclude that at least some chemical reactions are
far more complex than would be indicated by the equations that we
ordinarily use to express them. When, for example, a nitrate is
transformed into a sulphate, there seems to be formed a series of inter-
mediate systems, sulphonitrates or nitrosulphates. We know nothing
about these substances chemically, but their existence is made highly
probable by a purely physical method the action of these substances
on light.
This raises the question, are chemical reactions in general more com-
plex than we ordinarily represent them to be? Do these intermediate
systems exist in chemical reactions in general? It is impossible to
study all reactions by the spectroscopic method, if, for no other reason,
because many solutions do not have sharp and well-defined absorption.
The reactions, however, which can be studied directly by the spectro-
scopic method do not seem to differ in any fundamental manner from
those reactions which can not be so studied. They conform to the
same laws that are obeyed by other reactions and are in every respect
analogous to them. This leads to the conjecture that in those reac-
tions which can not be studied spectroscopically, there are also inter-
mediate systems or compounds which are too unstable to isolate; and
since they do not have characteristic spectra, their presence can not
even be detected. The formation of these intermediate systems is
strictly in accord with the action of mass in chemistry. Some such
intermediate compounds have in a number of reactions recently been
isolated by methods now at our disposal. As methods become more
refined, and we acquire better control of conditions, it seems not
improbable that many more intermediate compounds will be isolated.
At present we can not isolate any large percentage of these inter-
mediate systems on account of their instability. The best we can do
is to study their properties in solution in the different solvents by
purely physical methods. It is obvious that these intermediate sys-
tems must be studied if we are ever to know the real mechanism of
chemical reactions, and not simply the conditions at the beginning and
end of reactions. Other suggestions which have been offered to explain
the gradual shift of the absorption bands as one salt is transformed into
another, appear to be entirely inadequate, if not meaningless.
DISCUSSION OP EVIDENCE. 185
WORK OF JONES AND GUY ON THE ABSORPTION SPECTRA OF SOLUTIONS.
The work on the absorption spectra of solutions had, at the time
that Guy began his investigation, been extended to between 6,000 and
7,000 solutions. In all of this work the grating spectroscope had been
used, and the results recorded on a photographic plate. The photo-
graphic method recorded the positions of the various absorption lines
and bands, but gave only a qualitative, or at best a roughly quantita-
tive indication of the relative intensities of the various lines and bands.
The photographic method is, generally speaking, a qualitative method.
If we are ever to discover relations of fundamental significance
between the power of dissolved substances to absorb light and the
nature of solution, we must have some quantitative method of study-
ing the intensities of the absorption lines and bands and of the various
parts of the same bands. With this idea in mind a very sensitive radio-
micrometer was built and used to measure the intensity of absorption.
Before taking up this problem, Jones and Guy investigated two others
by the photographic method. They studied the effect of temperature
on the absorption spectra of aqueous solutions up to 200. This
required a specially designed apparatus which would not be attacked
by the superheated water-vapor. It was found that while some of the
bands of aqueous solutions are practically unaffected by rise in tem-
perature, many of them widen as the temperature is raised. The
widening of the absorption bands is usually not symmetrical, but is
generally towards the red. The red edge widens out, becoming more
hazy and diffuse, while the violet edge remains pretty sharp. The
effect of rise in temperature on the absorption spectra of aqueous solu-
tions is, then, often analogous to the effect produced by increasing the
concentration of the solution. This is especially the case with solutions
of praseodymium nitrate. The effect of dilution on absorption spectra
was studied pretty thoroughly by Jones and Guy. It was well known
that both molecules and ions can absorb light, and the question was,
do they have the same or different absorption? Jones and Anderson 1
had shown that if they absorb differently, the difference is slight. To
detect any such differences wide ranges in dilution must be employed.
Cells were devised for holding the solutions, which were 0.5 cm.,
50 cm., and 250 cm. in length. The concentrations were varied in
the same proportions as the lengths of the cells. If we call the con-
centration used in the shortest cell unity, 100 times as dilute a solution
was used in the cell which was 50 cm. long, and this was diluted 5 tunes
for the longest cell. It was found that many of the absorption bands
of neodymium chloride and bromide widen as the concentration of the
solution is increased. Some of the bands of neodymium sulphate and
acetate show similar changes with increase in the concentration of the
solution. The most marked changes, however, are produced with the
bands of neodymium nitrate. Many of them show very pronounced
'Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 110.
186 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
widening with increase in concentration. Solutions of praseodymium
salts also show a widening of the absorption bands as the concentra-
tions are increased, but these changes are less pronounced than with
salts of neodymium. The absorption spectra of uranyl salts change
more with change in concentration than the spectra even of salts of
neodymium. The changes are in the same direction, the bands increas-
ing in breadth with increase in concentration.
These results are what would be expected from the solvate theory of
solution. As the concentration of the solution is changed, the com-
plexity of the solvate about the molecules or ions is changed. It would
seem that this ought to affect the resonance of the solvated resonator.
As the concentration of the solution is increased the solvate becomes
simpler and simpler. The vibrating particle surrounded by a simple
solvate should show different absorption than when surrounded by a
complex solvate. The above results show that such is the case, the more
concentrated the solution the wider in general the absorption bands.
The radiomicrometer not only provides us with a method of study-
ing absorption spectra quantitatively, but greatly extends the range
of wave-lengths that can be studied. The earlier work with the very
sensitive radiomicrometer had to do with the study of solutions of
neodymium salts. The effect of dilution on absorption spectra was
also investigated quantitatively by means of the radiomicrometer.
It was found by this method, as with the grating and photographic
plate, that the more concentrated the solution the broader the absorp-
tion bands. It was also found that in the more dilute solution, while
the absorption bands were narrower, they were more intense. Further,
in the more dilute solutions the centers of the bands were displaced
towards the longer wave-lengths.
The most interesting and important result brought out by the work
of Jones and Guy was the effect of the dissolved substance on the ab-
sorption of light by water. We noted that aqueous solutions of certain
hydrated salts are more transparent than pure water. This is obvi-
ously a fact which called for careful study. We compared the absorp-
tion of aqueous solutions of strongly hydrated salts, with the absorption
of a layer of water equal in depth to the water in the solution. Similar
experiments were carried out with salts which are only slightly
hydrated. The slightly hydrated salts with which we worked were
potassium chloride and ammonium chloride and nitrate. It was
necessary to select colorless salts which themselves had little or no
absorption in the infra-red where water absorbs. It was found, in the
earlier work, that the above-named compounds had nearly the same
absorption as water having the same depth as the water in the solution;
but in subsequent work this conclusion must be modified for certain
substances near the bottoms of the absorption bands.
In terms of the solvate theory of solution, we should expect the
absorption of the solution of a slightly hydrated salt in general not to
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 187
differ very greatly from that of so much pure water, since, when the
solvent is not combined with the dissolved substance, it is difficult to see
how either could affect appreciably the absorbing power of the other.
When we turned to the strongly hydrated salts, very different results
were obtained. As examples of this class of substances we studied
calcium and magnesium chlorides and aluminium sulphate. Take the
results for a 5.3 normal solution of calcium chloride. The solution is
more transparent from 0.9 n to 1 p.. It is again the more transparent
from 1.05ju to 1.2/i, being as much as 25 per cent more transparent
than the solution. For the longer wave-lengths the water is in general
the more transparent until 1.42 M is reached, when both water and
solution become equally opaque. Similar results were obtained with
magnesium chloride.
Aluminium sulphate presents this peculiarity, that at 1 // the solu-
tion is more transparent than the water. The obvious explanation of
these surprising results seems to be that they must be due to some
action of the dissolved substance on the solvent. Jones and Anderson 1
showed that the solvent can have a marked effect on the absorbing
power of the solution in that solvent, even when the solvent itself had
no absorption in the region in question.
A large number of examples of "solvent bands" were discovered by
Jones and Strong. 2 They found many non-absorbing solvents which
affected the absorption of the dissolved substance, and could even dis-
tinguish between certain organic solvents and their "iso" compounds
by the "solvent bands" which manifested themselves. This action
seems to have been satisfactorily explained as due to a combination of
the solvent with the dissolved substance forming solvates. The sol-
vate theory enables us to account for many facts which apparently
could not be satisfactorily explained by the theory of electrolytic dis-
sociation alone, as we have seen. The same theory seems to aid us in
explaining the facts just described. Those compounds which do not
form hydrates, or which form only very simple hydrates, such as
potassium chloride and the like, show results such as would be expected.
Their solutions are not more transparent than so much pure water.
In general, the absorption of such solutions is of the same order of
magnitude as that of the water in which they are dissolved. We shall
see that it came out in later work that solutions of only slightly hy-
drated salts are more opaque than pure water at the centers of the
absorption bands. This, however, does not affect at all the conclu-
sions drawn above. It is only the hydrated salts whose solutions are
appreciably more transparent than so much pure water. How does
the solvate theory explain these facts?
The combined water seems to have less power to absorb light than
free water. This would account for the above facts. The presence
Carnegie lust. Wash. Pub. No. 110. *Ibid., Nos. 130 and 160.
188 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
of the salt seems to shift the absorption of the water towards the
larger wave-lengths. Rise in temperature and increase in concentra-
tion shift the absorption of the salt towards the longer wave-lengths.
The effect of rise in temperature and increase in concentration is to
simplify the hydrates existing in the solution. Simplifying the resona-
tor, then, shifts the absorption towards the red.
The effect of the salt on the absorption of the water, is the same as
rise in temperature and increase in the concentration of the solution
on the absorption of the dissolved substance. It may well be that the
dissolved substance diminishes the association of the solvent and this
simplifies the solvent resonator. This may be true, especially with
water of hydration, which is more directly under the influence of the
dissolved substance than the free water.
WORK OF JONES. SHAEFFER, AND PAULUS.
The result obtained by Jones and Guy was regarded as of such
importance in its bearing on the solvate theory of solution, that it
was thought desirable to repeat and elaborate with improved method
the work which led to it. Certain details of method and manipulation
were carefully studied, and the degree of accuracy of the procedure
adopted was carefully ascertained. This has all been discussed in
detail in the first chapter of this monograph. The non-hydrating or
slightly hydrating salts, potassium chloride, ammonium bromide, and
sodium nitrate, were studied. The strongly hydrated calcium chloride,
magnesium chloride, magnesium bromide, magnesium sulphate, mag-
nesium nitrate, zinc sulphate, and zinc nitrate were investigated at
varying concentrations and depths of layers.
Solutions of the strongly hydrated salts have in general greater
transparency than pure water, especially at the centers of the absorp-
tion bands. As the regions of intense absorption are approached in the
longer wave-lengths, the solution is much more transparent than the
pure solvent. This difference may amount to as much as 40 per cent.
The non-hydrated or only slightly hydrated salts give results which,
in many respects, are exactly the opposite of those obtained with
hydrated salts. In the three cases studied, the solution had greater
absorption than the solvent at the centers of the bands. This is pre-
cisely the opposite of what was found for the strongly hydrated salts.
Regions of the spectrum, for which solutions of hydrated salts were as
much as 40 per cent more transparent than the solvent, show for non-
hydrated salts that the solution is 40 per cent less transparent.
It was pointed out that the results obtained could be best explained
by the solvate theory of solution. Indeed, this evidence is of the very
strongest for that theory. In the solutions studied, more than half
of the water was shown to be combined with the dissolved substance.
It was shown that this would certainly alter the vibrational frequency
or resonance of the absorbing systems.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 189
The transmission curves obtained seem to justify the conclusion that
combined water has less power to absorb light than uncombined. We
have been able to find no other rational explanation which would
account satisfactorily for our results. The difference in the behavior
of hydrated and non-hydrated salts seems unquestionable.
Any attempt to explain such a difference as the above on the ground
of a change in the dielectric constant of the medium does not appear to
have a good physical basis. Why the presence of the one class of
salts alters the dielectric constant of the medium differently from the
other class, is a question that would have to be answered. This
attempt to explain our results does not appear to be much more than
words. We regard, then, the spectroscopic evidence in its bearing on
the solvate theory of solution as among the most important. The
presence of definite "solvent bands" in the different solvents and the
difference between the absorption of aqueous solutions of non-hydrated
and strongly hydrated salts are to be counted as among the strongest
and most direct lines of evidence thus far brought to light in my labora-
tory bearing on the solvate theory of solution.
SUMMARY OF THE LINES OF EVIDENCE OBTAINED IN THIS LABORATORY BEARING
ON THE SOLVATE THEORY OF SOLUTION.
The following lines of evidence bearing on the solvate theory of
solution have, then, been established in this laboratory. 1
1. Relation between lowering of the freezing-point of water and
water of crystallization of the dissolved substance.
2. Approximate composition of the hydrates formed by various
substances in solution.
3. Relation between the minima in the freezing-point curves and
the minima in the boiling-point curves.
4. Relation between water of crystallization and temperature of
crystallization.
5. Hydrate theory in aqueous solutions becomes the solvate theory
in solutions in general.
6. Temperature coefficients of conductivity and hydration.
7. Relation between hydration of the ions and then* ionic volumes.
8. Hydration of the ions and the velocities with which they move.
9. Dissociation as measured by the freezing-point method and by
the conductivity method.
10. Effect of one salt with hydrating power on the hydrates formed
by a second salt in the same solution.
11. Investigations in mixed solvents.
12. Spectroscopic evidence bearing on the solvate theory of solution;
work of Jones and Uhler. m
13. Work of Jones and Anderson on absorption spectra, in which
the presence of " solvate" bands was first detected. This showed that
'See Journ. Franklin Inst., Dec. 1913.
190 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
the solvate had an effect on the absorption of light, and this could be
explained only as due to a combination between the solvent and the
resonator, or something containing the resonator.
14. The work of Jones and Strong on absorption spectra established
the existence of a larger number of ' ' solvent "bands . They showed that
these were formed by many salts and in many solvents. They could
even distinguish between the bands of a salt in a given alcohol and in
its isomer. This was regarded as very important. The temperature
work of Jones and Strong was strong evidence for the solvate theory.
15. The work of Jones and Guy on the effect of high temperature on
the absorption spectra of aqueous solutions, and also on the effect of dilu-
tion, led to results which were all in keeping with the solvate theory.
The most important spectroscopic work of Jones and Guy, which
bears on the solvate theory of solution, is that in which the radio-
micrometer was used. It was here shown that solutions of certain
strongly-hydrated non-absorbing salts are more transparent than pure
water having a depth equal to that of the water in the solution. In the
case of non-hydrated salts the solution was the more opaque. This
shows that water in combination with the dissolved substance water
of hydration has less absorption than pure, free water. This is
regarded as striking evidence that some of the water in the presence
of salts which are shown by other methods to hydrate is different
from pure, free, uncombined water; and the simplest explanation seems
to be that this is the combined water, or the water of hydration.
16. The work of Jones and Guy was repeated and extended by
Jones, Shaeffer, and Paulus. They obtained results of the same general
character as those found by Jones and Guy. Solutions of hydrated
salts were in general more transparent than pure water, especially at
the centers of the absorption bands. Solutions of non-hydrated or
only slightly hydrated salts are more opaque than pure water, especially
at the centers of the bands.
The above sixteen lines of evidence all point to the general correct-
ness of the view that when a salt is dissolved in a solvent there is more
or less combination between the salt, or the ions resulting from it,
and the solvent. The magnitude of this solvation depends upon the
nature of the substance and of the solvent.
HOW THE PRESENT SOLVATE THEORY OF SOLUTION DIFFERS FROM THE OLDER
HYDRATE THEORY.
The present solvate theory of solution is not simply one of several
possible suggestions which accounts for a certain class of experimental
facts. It is the only suggestion that has thus far been made which
seems to account satisfactorily for all of the facts established. Most
of the above sixteen lines of evidence bearing on solvation in solution
were obtained as the direct result of experimental work suggested by
the solvate theory and carried out to test this theory. Many of the
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 191
results were predicted from this theory before a single experiment
was carried out. Solvation, then, being accepted, as now seems pretty
generally the case, the question arises, how does the present solvate
theory of solution differ from the older hydrate theory of Mendele"eff,
which has long since been abandoned as untenable?
Mendele"erTs theory was that certain hydroscopic substances, such
as calcium chloride, sulphuric acid, and the like, formed a few definite
hydrates when in the presence of water. Thus, sulphuric acid formed
the hydrates H 2 S0 4 .2H 2 O, H 2 S0 4 .6H 2 O, H 2 SO 4 .100H 2 0.
This view of Mendele*eff was proposed as the result especially of
measuring the specific gravities of aqueous solutions of such com-
pounds at different dilutions. When the specific gravities were plotted
against the concentrations, the curve was not a continuous one, but
showed a number of breaks. These breaks Mendele*eff could account
for by assuming that certain definite hydrates or compounds between
water and the dissolved substances existed at these concentrations.
This was among the most important evidence brought to light bearing
on the so-called hydrate theory of Mendele"eff.
This suggestion of Mendele"eff, based upon such inadequate evidence,
should not be called a theory. It is scarcely worthy of the name
hypothesis. Before a suggestion becomes a theory there should be a
fair amount of evidence supporting it, and showing not only that the sug-
gestion accounts for the facts, but that it is the only suggestion which
will account for them. This was lacking in the so-called Mendele"eff
hydrate theory.
The present solvate theory of solution may claim to have a fairly
good experimental support, as the above review of the evidence ob-
tained in this laboratory will show. In aqueous solutions hydration
is a general phenomenon. Some substances combine with very little
water, but most salts combine with very large amounts of water, the
amount of combined water for any given substance being a function
of the concentration of the solution and of the temperature. The
more dilute the solution the larger the amount of the solvent com-
bined with the dissolved substance the more complex the hydrate.
The lower the temperature the more complex the solvate. These
solvates are very unstable; indeed, so unstable that it seems better to
call them systems than definite chemical compounds. Anything so
easily broken down by rise in temperature could hardly be called a
chemical compound. Here, again, the present solvate theory differs
from the older hydrate theory.
While there is some spectroscopic evidence pointing to the existence
in solution of a certain definite hydrate, or certain definite hydrates,
we have obtained a large amount of evidence which seems to indicate
the existence in aqueous solutions of a large number of hydrates, or
indeed of a whole series of hydrates, the composition depending pri-
marily on the concentration of the solution. While this is not essential
192 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
to the present solvate theory of solution, it would differentiate it funda-
mentally from the older hydrate theory.
The present theory is not simply a hydrate theory of aqueous solu-
tions. Evidence has been obtained, and is herein briefly discussed,
which shows that solvents other than water combine with the dis-
solved substance. This has been established for the alcohols by the
boiling-point method, and for the alcohols and many other solvents by
spectroscopic investigations. Indeed, enough evidence has already been
obtained to make it highly probable that solvation is not limited to
aqueous solutions, but is a general property of solutions. Solvents in
general have more or less power to combine with substances dissolved in
them in a word, we have the solvate instead of simply a hydrate theory.
A method has been worked out in this laboratory for determining
the approximate composition of the hydrates existing in aqueous solu-
tions. This makes the present theory useful scientifically. We can
now determine approximately the amount of " combined" and the
amount of " free " water existing in any given aqueous solution. Thus,
our theory is placed upon a workable basis, and enables us to determine,
in any given case, how much of the liquid present is really playing the
role of solvent.
The evidence pointing to the general correctness of the solvate theory
of solution is, then, so strong that it seems that this conception is in
accord with a fundamental condition in connection with the nature of
solution.
Further, our solvate theory of solution is very different from the
earlier, unproved hydrate theory of Mendele"eff.
The question now arises, of what scientific significance or value is the
establishing of the fact that there is more or less combination between
the dissolved substance and the solvent?
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SOLVATE THEORY OF SOLUTION. 1
The evidence for the solvate theory of solution, which has been fur-
nished in this laboratory as the result of somewhat more than a dozen
years of investigation, has recently been brought together and briefly
discussed. 2 The evidence is so unambiguous and convincing, that ions
and some molecules combine with more or less of the solvent, that it
seems that it can now be accepted as a fact of science.
This, however, raises a number of questions : What relation does the
solvate theory of solution bear to the theory of electrolytic dissociation?
Does the solvate theory help us to explain any of the apparent dis-
crepancies in the theory of electrolytic dissociation? Does the solvate
theory help us to explain the facts of chemistry in general and of
physical chemistry in particular? Why is the nature of solution so
important, not only for chemistry but for science in general?
1 This section is taken directly from my paper in the Journal of the Franklin Institute, Dec. 1913.
2 Zeit. phys. Chem., 74, 325 (1910).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 193
THE SOLVATE THEORY AND THE THEORY OF ELECTROLYTIC DISSOCIATION.
When Arrhenius proposed the theory of electrolytic dissociation,
the question was not even raised as to the condition of the ions in the
solution, except that they behave as if they existed independently of
one another in solution. The theory simply said that molecules of
acids, bases, and salts, in the presence of a dissociating solvent like
water, break down to a greater or less extent into charged parts called
ions, the cations or positively charged parts being electrically equiva-
lent to the anions or negatively charged parts. The cations are usually
simple metallic atoms carrying one or more unit charges of positive
electricity. The cation might, however, be more or less complex, as
illustrated by ammonium and its substitution products. The anion is
usually complex, consisting of a larger or smaller number of atoms.
It may, however, be an atom carrying negative electricity, as in the
case of the halogen acids and their salts.
The degree of dissociation is determined by the nature of the acid,
base, or salt. Strong acids and bases are greatly dissociated. Indeed,
the degree of dissociation determines their strength. Nearly all of the
salts are strongly dissociated compounds, there being, however, some
exceptions, as, notably, the halogen salts of mercury, cadmium, and
zinc. There are, however, considerable differences in the amounts to
which salts in general are dissociated at the same dilution.
The quantitative evidence furnished by Arrhenius and others for the
theory of electrolytic dissociation is so convincing that few chemists
of any prominence, who have carefully examined the evidence, have
ever doubted the general validity of the theory; and the theory has
become substantiated by such an abundance of subsequently discovered
facts that it has now become a law of nature and a fundamental law
of chemical science.
Arrhenius saw and pointed out clearly the importance of ions for
chemistry ; Ostwald and his pupils have shown that chemistry is essen-
tially a science of the ion, molecules for the most part being incapable
of reacting chemically with molecules; and Nernst has proved that the
ion is the active agent in all forms of primary cells.
The theory of electrolytic dissociation, as already stated, does not
raise the question as to the relation between the ion and the solvent.
At the time that the theory was proposed, chemists did not know, and
probably had no means of finding out, whether the ion is or is not com-
bined with the solvent in contact with it. The solution of this problem
remained for subsequent work.
Some of the many lines of evidence that ions and certain molecules
are combined with a larger or smaller number of molecules of the sol-
vent, and in many cases with a very large number of molecules of the
solvent, have been recently discussed briefly by Jones in an article in
194 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
the Zeitschrift fur physikalische Chemie. 1 The amount of the solvent
combined with an ion is primarily a function of the nature of the ion
or ions in the solution. It is, however, conditioned very largely by the
dilution of the solution, and also by the temperature.
The evidence, some of which is given in the paper referred to above,
and the remainder in other publications, of the results of investigations
carried out in this laboratory during the past fifteen years, shows
that the power of the ions to combine with the solvent is by no means
limited to water and aqueous solutions, but is a property of solutions
in general. The alcohols, acetone, glycerol, 2 etc., combine with certain
substances dissolved in them; and it seems more than probable that
all solvents combine with the dissolved substances to a greater or less
extent. In a word, we do not have simply a theory of hydration, but a
theory of solvation in general, which is an essential part of any general-
ization that would take into account the facts presented by solution.
The solvate theory of solution has been regarded in some quarters
as a rival of the electrolytic dissociation theory of solution, if not
directly antagonistic to it. Such is not at all the case. The solvate
theory begins where the theory of electrolytic dissociation ends. The
latter gives us the ions from molecules, and the former tells us the con-
dition of the ions in the presence of a solvent after they are formed.
The solvate theory of solution, then, simply supplements the theory
of electrolytic dissociation, and both must be taken into account if we
ever wish to understand the phenomena presented by solution.
DOES THE SOLVATE THEORY HELP TO EXPLAIN ANY OF THE APPARENT
EXCEPTIONS TO THE THEORY OF ELECTROLYTIC DISSOCIATION?
Given the theory of solvation in solution together with that of elec-
trolytic dissociation, the first question that arises is, does the former
really aid us in explaining the phenomena presented by solutions?
Shortly after the theory of electrolytic dissociation was proposed, it
was recognized and repeatedly pointed out, that after all it is only a
theory of ' ' ideal solutions, "i.e., very dilute solutions. It was shown not
to be able to explain many of the phenomena presented by even fairly
concentrated solutions. Indeed, it frequently could not deal quanti-
tatively with the very solutions with which we work in the laboratory.
The explanation of this shortcoming was not fully seen, and an
analogy was resorted to. It was pointed out that the laws of Boyle
and Gay-Lussac for gases hold only for ''ideal gases," i. e., dilute gases,
but do not hold for gases of any considerable concentration.
It was stated that the gas laws when applied to solutions could not
be expected to hold more generally than when applied to gases, and
there the matter was allowed to rest.
l " Evidence obtained in this laboratory during the past twelve years for the solvate theory of
solution." Zeit. phys. Chem., 74, 325 (1910).
2 " Conductivity and viscosity in mixed solvents," by H. C. Jones and co-workers, Carnegie
Inst. Wash. Pub. Nos. 80 and 180.
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 195
In the early days of the theory of electrolytic dissociation it was,
however, pointed out that we have a fairly satisfactory explanation
of why the simple gas laws do not hold for concentrated gases, this
being expressed in the equation of Van der Waals; while no analogous
explanation was offered in the case of solutions. That this point was
well taken is obvious. A theory of solution, to be of the greatest value,
must be applicable to all solutions, regardless of the nature of the sub-'
stance, regardless of the nature of the solvent, and regardless of the
concentration of the solution.
The explanation of these apparent exceptions to the theory of elec-
trolytic dissociation presented by concentrated solutions has been fur-
nished by the solvate theory. We now know that, for solutions in
general, a part of the solvent is combined with the dissolved substance.
While the amount of the solvent combined with any one ion is greater
the more dilute the solution, at least up to a certain point, the total
amount of the solvent in combination with the dissolved substance is
greater the more concentrated the solution.
That the amount of combined solvent may become very great, even
relative to the total amount of solvent present, can be seen from the
following facts: In a normal solution of calcium chloride about two-
fifths of the total water present is combined with the dissolved sub-
stance. In a three-normal solution of calcium chloride about five-
sevenths of the total water is combined.
In the case of a normal solution of aluminium chloride in water,
about five-eighths of the water present is combined with the dissolved
substance, while in a two-normal solution about five-sixths of the water
present is in a state of combination.
What we suppose to be a normal solution of calcium chloride is, there-
fore, more than 1 tunes normal, while what we suppose to be a three-
normal solution is in reality more than eight tunes normal. In the
case of aluminium chloride, what we suppose to be a normal solution
is more than twice normal, while what we prepare as a twice normal
solution is about twelve times normal.
These few facts, taken from thousands of a similar character, show
that even fairly concentrated solutions are much more concentrated
than we would suppose from the method of their preparation; while
very concentrated solutions are many times more concentrated than,
without the facts of solvation, we should be led to expect.
The general conclusion is that even fairly concentrated solutions
are much stronger than if no solvation occurred, and are much more
concentrated than we are accustomed to consider from the amount of
substance added to a given volume of the solution more or less of the
water present being in combination and only the remainder playing
the role of solvent. Without the theory of solvation, we have hitherto
regarded all of the water present as acting as solvent.
196 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
We should, therefore, not expect the laws of gases to apply to such
solutions, when we had no idea what was their concentration. Now
that we know their concentration, we find that the laws of gases are
of as general applicability to solutions as to gases, holding not simply
for dilute, but also for concentrated solutions.
The theory of electrolytic dissociation, supplemented by the theory of
solvation, is, then, not simply a theory of dilute or "ideal" solutions, but
a theory of solutions in general.
DOES THE SOLVATE THEORY AID IN EXPLAINING THE FACTS OF CHEMISTRY
IN GENERAL AND OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY IN PARTICULAR?
To answer this question at all fully would lead us far beyond the
scope of this monograph. A few facts bearing upon this question can,
however, be taken up. Take, for example, the action of the hydrogen
ion both in the formation and saponification of esters. In the presence
of the alcohols the hydrogen ion accelerates greatly the velocity with
which an ester is formed, while in the presence of water it causes the
ester to break down into the corresponding acid and alcohol.
In terms of ordinary chemical conceptions it is difficult, not to say
impossible, to interpret these reactions, the hydrogen ion under one set
of conditions undoing what under other conditions it effected.
In terms of the solvation theory these reactions admit of a very,
simple interpretation. While the hydrogen ion is not strongly solvated,
work in this laboratory has shown that all ions are more or less solvated.
In the presence of alcohol the hydrogen ion therefore combines with a
certain amount of this solvent. The hydrogen ion, plus the alcohol com-
bined with it, unites with the organic acid, forming complex alcoholated
ions which then break down yielding the ester.
On the other hand, the hydrogen ion in the presence of water com-
bines with a certain amount of this solvent. The hydrated hydrogen
ion, together with the water united with it, combines with the ester,
forming a complex hydrated ion, which then breaks down into the
corresponding acid and alcohol setting the hydrogen free again. For
a fuller discussion of this reaction see the paper by E. Emmet Reid. 1
A reaction analogous to the above is that of hydrogen ions on amides
in the presence of water on the one hand, and alcohol on the other hand.
In the presence of water the hydrated hydrogen ion combines with
the amide, forming a complex hydrated ion which then breaks down
yielding ammonia and acid, the ammonia, of course, combining with the
acid.
In the presence of alcohol the alcoholated hydrogen ion combines
with the amide, forming a complex alcoholated ion, which then breaks
down into ammonia and the ester of the acid in question.
Hydrogen ions in a mixture of water and alcohol, which would con-
tain both hydrated and alcoholated hydrogen ions, give both reactions
Amer. Chem. Journ., 41, 504 (1909).
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE. 197
simultaneously; but, as Reid has pointed out, in the presence of an
equal number of molecules of water and alcohol, the tendency of the
hydrogen ion to hydrate is greater than the tendency to form alcohol-
ates; and under these conditions the first reaction proceeds much more
rapidly than the second. 1 A very large number of types of reactions
could be discussed illustrating this same point, i. e., the value of the
solvate theory in interpreting chemical reactions.
When we turn to physical chemical processes, the solvation of the
ions has to be taken into account at every turn. The velocities of the
ions are, of course, a function of the degree of their solvation; and the
behavior of the ions, both chemically and physically, is a function of
their velocities. The effect of dilution, and especially of temperature
on reaction velocities, is largely a question of the velocities of the ions
present, which, in turn, are a function of the degree of their solvation.
In determining the actual concentration of a solution, the amount
of the solvent combined with the ions must be taken into account, as
has already been pointed out; and without knowing the actual concen-
trations of solutions quantitative chemistry would be impossible.
The solvate theory has thrown a flood of light on the whole subject
of the conductivity of solutions, or the power of the ions to carry the
electric current. It has shown us why the conductivity of lithium salts
is less than that of sodium and potassium, notwithstanding the fact
that the lithium ion is much smaller and lighter than the atom of sodium
or potassium. We now know that the lithium ion is much more
hydrated than the ions of these elements, and the mass of the moving
ion is really much greater in the case of lithium.
When we come to the temperature coefficients of conductivity, the
solvate theory has enabled us to interpret results which, without its
aid, would be meaningless. We now know why ions with the greater
hydrating power have the larger temperature coefficients of conduc-
tivity. We know why ions with the same hydrating power have
approximately the same temperature coefficients of conductivity, and
why dilute solutions have larger temperature coefficients of conduc-
tivity than concentrated solutions; 2 and, did space permit, we could
multiply examples, almost without limit, of the effect of the solvate
theory on physical or general chemistry.
WHY IS THE NATURE OF SOLUTIONS OF SUCH VITAL IMPORTANCE NOT
ONLY FOR CHEMISTRY BUT FOR SCIENCE IN GENERAL?
The fact is well recognized that modern physical or general chemistry
has reached out into nearly every branch of science, and has had an
important influence on many of them. The question arises: Why is
this the case? The answer is that physical or general chemistry is
primarily a science of solutions.
'Amer. Chem. Journ., 41, 509 (1909). Ibid., 35, 445 (1906).
198 DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE.
This answer may not at first appear to be self-evident, but a moment's
thought will show its general correctness. The whole science of chem-
istry is primarily a branch of the science of solutions in the broad
sense of that term. By solutions is meant not simply solutions in
liquids as the solvent, but solutions in gases and in solids as well ; and
not simple solutions at ordinary temperatures, but also at elevated
temperatures. If we think of chemical reactions in general, we will
realize what a small percentage of them takes place out of solution.
Therefore, the nature of solutions is absolutely fundamental for chem-
istry. This applies not simply to general chemistry, including the
chemistry of carbon, but also to physiological chemistry, which deals
almost entirely with solutions in one solvent or another.
When we turn to physics we find solutions not playing as prominent
a role as in chemistry, but nevertheless coming in in many places.
The primary cells, secondary cells, electrolysis, polarization, diffusion,
viscosity, surface-tension, are all phenomena in which the physicist is
interested, and all depend for their existence upon solution.
When we turn to the biological sciences we find that solution is
almost as important as for chemistry. Take animal physiology ; here we
have to deal very largely with solution in the broad sense of that term.
The same remark applies to physiological botany; and solutions are
very important for both animal and vegetable morphology, especially
in their experimental developments. Bacteriology is fundamentally
connected with solutions, and pharmacology is based upon solutions
either without or within the body of the animal.
Solution in the broad sense is as fundamental for geology as for
chemistry. The igneous rocks were solutions of one molten mass in
another; and sedimentary deposits came down for the most part from
solutions true or colloidal in water. The minerals crystallized out from
solutions, and solutions of various substances, such as carbon dioxide,
are to-day weathering the rocks and continually changing the appear-
ance of the face of the globe.
An examination of facts such as those referred to above will show
that the relation of physical or general chemistry to solutions is the
prune reason why physical or general chemistry is so closely related
to so many other branches of natural science. This alone would show
the importance of a true and comprehensive theory of solutions, not
alone for physical or general chemistry, but for the natural sciences in
general.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
It has seemed desirable, at the close of this resumt of the more
important lines of evidence bearing on the solvate theory, to give a
bibliography of the papers and monographs which have been published
from this laboratory dealing directly and indirectly with the subject.
PAPERS.
1. JONES AND CHAMBERS : " On some abnormal freezing-point lowerings produced by bromides
and chlorides of the alkaline earths." Amer. Chem. Journ., 23, 89 (1900).
2. CHAMBERS AND FRAZEB: "On a minimum in the molecular lowering of the freezing-point
of water, produced by certain acids and salts." Amer. Chem. Journ., 23, 512 (1900).
3. JONES AND GETMAN: "The lowering of the freezing-point of water produced by concen-
trated solutions of certain electrolytes, and the conductivity of such solutions." Amer
Chem. Journ., 27, 433 (1902).
4. JONES AND GETMAN: "The molecular lowering of the freezing-point of water produced by
concentrated solutions of certain electrolytes." Zeit. phys. Chem, 46, 244 (1903).
5. JONES AND GETMAN: "A study of the molecular lowering of the freezing-point of water
produced by concentrated solutions of electrolytes." Phys. Rev., 18, 146 (1904).
6. JONES AND GETMAN: "On the nature of concentrated solutions of electrolytes hydrates in
solution." Amer. Chem. Journ., 31, 303 (1904).
7. JONES AND GETMAN: " Ueber das Vorhandensein von Hydraten in konzentrierten wasserigen
Losungen von Elektrolyten." Zeit. phys. Chem., 49, 385 (1904).
8. JONES AND GETMAN: "Ueber die Existenz von Hydraten in konzentrierten wasserigen
Losungen der Elektrolyte und einiger Nichtelektrolyte." Ber. d. chem. Gesell., 37, 1511
(1904).
9. JONES AND GETMAN: "The existence of alcoholates in solutions of certain electrolytes in
alcohol." Amer. Chem. Journ., 32, 338 (1904).
10. JONES AND GETMAN: "The existence of hydrates in solutions of certain non-electrolytes,
and the non-existence of hydrates in solutions of organic acids." Amer. Chem. Journ.,
32, 308 (1904).
11. JONES AND BASSETT: "The approximate composition of the hydrates formed by certain
electrolytes in aqueous solutions at different concentrations." Amer. Chem. Journ., 33,
534 (1905).
12. JONES AND BASSETT: " Der Einfluss der Temperatur auf die Kristallwassermenge als Beweis
fur die Theorie von den Hydraten in Losung." Zeit. phys. Chem., 52, 231 (1905).
13. JONES AND BASSETT: "The approximate composition of the hydrates formed by a number
of electrolytes in aqueous solutions ; together with a brief general discussion of the results
thus far obtained." Amer. Chem. Journ., 34, 291 (1905).
14. JONES: "L'existence d'hydrates dans les solutions aqueuses d'electrolytes." Journ.
Chim. Phys., 3, 455 (1905).
15. JONES AND MCMASTER: "On the formation of alcoholates by certain salts in solution in
methyl and ethyl alcohols." Amer. Chem. Journ., 35, 316 (1906).
16. JONES: "Die annahernde Zusammensetzung der Hydrate, welche von verschiedenen Elek-
trolyten in wasseriger Losung gebildet werden." Zeit. phys. Chem., 55, 385 (1906).
17. JONES AND UHLER: " The absorption spectra of certain salts in aqueous solution as affected
by the presence of certain other salts with large hydrating power." Amer. Chem. Journ.,
37, 126 (1907).
18. JONES AND UHLER: "The absorption spectra of certain salts in non-aqueous solvents, as
affected by the addition of water." Amer. Chem. Journ., 37, 244 (1907).
19. JONES AND PEARCE: "Dissociation as measured by freezing-point lowering and by con-
ductivitybearing on the hydrate theory. The approximate composition of the
hydrates formed by a number of electrolytes." Amer. Chem. Journ., 38, 683 (1907).
20. JONES AND STINE: "The effect of one salt on the hydrating power of another salt present
in the same solution." Amer. Chem. Journ., 39, 313 (1908).
21. JONES AND ANDERSON: "The absorption spectra of neodymium chloride and praseodym-
ium chloride in water, methyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol, and mixtures of these solvents."
Proceed. Amer. Philosoph. Soc., 47, 276 (1908).
22. JONES AND JACOBSON: "The conductivity and ionization of electrolytes in aqueous solu-
tions as conditioned by temperature, dilution, and hydrolysis." Amer. Chem. Journ., 40,
355 /1QQC\
23. JONES: "The present status of the solvate theory." Amer. Chem. Journ., 41, 19 (1909).
200 BIBLIOGRAPHY.
24. JONES AND ANDERSON: "The absorption spectra of solutions of a number of salts in water,
in certain non-aqueous solvents, and in mixtures of these solvents with water." Amer.
Chem. Journ., 41, 163 (1909).
25. JONES AND STRONG : "Die Absorptionsspektren gewisser Salzlosungen." Phys. Zeils.,
10, 499 (1909).
26. JONES AND STRONG: "The absorption spectra of various salts in solution, and the effect of
temperature on such spectra." Amer. Chem. Journ., 43, 37 (1910).
27. JONES AND STRONG: "The absorption spectra of various potassium, uranyl, uranous, and
neodymium salts in solution; and the effect of temperature on the absorption spectra of
certain colored salts in solution." Proceed. Amer. Philosoph. Soc., 48, 194 (1909).
28. JONES AND STRONG: "The absorption spectra of solutions a possible method of detecting
the presence of intermediate compounds in chemical reactions." Amer. Chem. Journ.,
43, 224 (1910).
29. JONES AND STRONG: "The absorption spectra of certain uranyl and uranous compounds."
Phil. Mag., April 1910.
30. JONES AND STRONG: "Spectres d. absorption des solutions. Possibilite d. une methode
pour determiner la presence de composis intermediares dans les reactions chimiques.
Journ. Chim. Phys., 8, 131 (1910).
31. JONES: "In hiesigen Laboratorium wahrend der vergangenen zwolf Jahre erhaltene Anhalts-
punkte fur die Existenz von Solvaten in Losung." Zeit. phys. Chem., 74, 325 (1910).
32. JONES AND STRONG: "The absorption spectra of certain salts of cobalt, erbium, neodymium,
and uranium, as affected by temperature and by chemical reagents." Amer. Chem.
Journ., 45, 1 (1910).
33. JONES: "Sur la position de la theorie des solvatea." Journ. Chim. Phys., 9, 217 (1911).
34. JONES AND STRONG: "The absorption spectra of comparatively rare salts. The spectro-
photography of certain chemical reactions, and the effect of high temperature on the
absorption spectra of non-aqueous solutions." Amer. Chem. Journ., 47, 27 (1912).
35. JONES: "The nature of solution." Journ. Franklin Institute, 217 (March 1912).
36. JONES: "Absorption spectra and the solvate theory of solution." Phil. Mag., 730 (May
1912).
37. JONES: " Die Absorptionsspektra von Losungen." Zeit. phys. Chem., 80, 361 (1912).
38. JONES AND GUY: " Die Absorptionsspektren wasseriger Losungen von Neodym- und Praseo-
dymsalzen, mit dem Radiomikrometer gemessen." Phys. Zeit., 13, 649 (1912).
39. JONES AND GUY: "The absorption spectra of solutions as affected by temperature and by
dilution. A quantitative study of absorption spectra by means of the radiomicrometer."
Amer. Chem. Journ., 49, 1 (1913).
40. GUY, SHAEFFER, AND JONES: "Die Anderung der Absorption des Lichtes durch Wasser
infolge der Gegenwart stark hydrierter Salze, nachgewiesen mit Hilfe des Radiomikrome-
ters ein neuer Beweis fur die Solvat-theorie des Losungen." Phys. Zeit., 14, 278 (1913) .
Also. Amer. Chem. Journ., 49, 265 (1913).
41. GUY AND JONES: "The absorption spectra of a number of salts as measured by means of the
radiomicrometer." Amer. Chem. Journ. (November 1913).
CONDUCTIVITY, TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS OF CONDUCTIVITY, AND DISSOCIATION
IN AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS.
42. JONES AND WEST: "A study of the temperature coefficients of conductivity in aqueous
solutions, and on the effect of temperature on dissociation." Amer. Chem. Journ., 34,
357 (1905).
43. JONES AND JACOBSON: See above, No. 22.
44. JONES AND WHITE: "The effect of temperature and dilution on the conductivity of organic
acids in aqueous solution." Amer. Chem. Journ., 42, 520 (1909).
45. CLOVER AND JONES: "The conductivities, dissociations, and temperature coefficients of
conductivity between 35 and 80 of solutions of a number of salts and organic acids."
Amer. Chem. Journ., 43, 187 (1910).
46. WHITE AND JONES: "The conductivity and dissociation of organic acids in aqueous solu-
tion at different temperatures." Amer. Chem. Journ., 44, 159 (1910).
47. WEST AND JONES: "The conductivity, dissociation, and temperature coefficients of con-
ductivity at 35, 50, and 65 of aqueous solutions of a number of salts." Amer. Chem.
Journ., 44, 508 (1910).
48. WIGHTMAN AND JONES: "A study of the conductivity and dissociation of organic acids in
aqueous solution between zero and thirty-five degrees." Amer. Chem. Journ., 46, 56
(1911).
49. HOSFORD AND JONES: " The conductivities, temperature coefficients of conductivity, and
dissociation of certain electrolytes." Amer. Chem. Journ., 46, 240 (1911).
50. WINSTON AND JONES: "The conductivity, temperature coefficients of conductivity, and
dissociation of certain electrolytes in aqueous solution from to 35. Probable induc-
tive action in solution, and evidence for the complexity of the ion." Amer. Chem. Journ.,
46, 368 (1911).
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 201
51. WIGHTMAN AND JONES: "A study of the conductivity and dissociation of certain organic
acids at 35, 50, and 65." Amer. Chem. Journ., 48, 320 (1912).
52. SPRINGER AND JONES: "A study of the conductivity and dissociation of certain organic
acids in aqueous solution atdifferent temperatures." Amer. Chem. Journ., 48, 411 (1912).
53. HOWARD AND JONES: "The conductivity, temperature coefficients of conductivity, and
dissociation of certain electrolytes in aqueous solution at 35 50 and 65 " Amer
Chem. Journ., 48, 500 (1912).
54. SHAEFFER AND JONES: "A study of the conductivity, dissociation, and temperature coeffi-
cients of conductivity of certain inorganic salts in aqueous solution, as conditioned by
temperature, dilution, hydration, and hydrolysis." Amer. Chem. Journ., 49, 207 (1913).
55. SMITH AND JONES: "Conductivity, temperature coefficients of conductivity, dissociation]
and dissociation constants of certain organic acids between and 65." Amer Chem
Journ., 50, 1 (1913).
56. JONES: " The bearing of hydrates on the temperature coefficients of conductivity of aqueous
solutions." Amer. Chem. Journ., 35, 445 (1906).
WORK IN MIXED SOLVENTS.
57. JONES AND LINDSAY: "A study of the conductivity of certain salts in water, methyl, ethyl,
and propyl alcohols, and in mixtures of these solvents." Amer. Chem. Journ., 28, 329
(1902).
58. JONES AND MURRAY: "The association of a liquid diminished by the presence of another
associated liquid." Amer. Chem. Journ., 30, 193 (1903).
59. JONES AND BASSETT: "Determination of the relative velocities of the ions of silver nitrate
in mixtures of the alcohols and water, and on the conductivity of such mixtures." Amer.
Chem. Journ., 32, 409 (1904).
60. JONES AND CARROLL: "A study of the conductivities of certain electrolytes in water,
methyl, and ethyl alcohols, and in mixtures of these solvents. Relation between conduc-
tivity and viscosity." Amer. Chem. Joum., 32, 521 (1904).
61. JONES AND BINGHAM: "The conductivity and viscosity of solutions of certain salts in mix-
tures of acetone with methyl alcohol, with ethyl alcohol, and water." Amer. Chem.
Journ., 34, 481 (1905).
62. JONES, LINDSAY, AND CARROLL: "Ueber die Leitfahigkeit gewisser Salze in gemischten
Losungsmitteln: Wasser, Methyl, Athyl, und Prophylakohol." Zeit. phys. Chem., 56,
129 (1906).
63. JONES AND MCMASTER: "The conductivity and viscosity of solutions of certain salts in
water, methyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol, acetone, and binary mixtures of these solvents."
Amer. Chem. Journ., 36, 326 (1906).
64. JONES AND ROUILLER: "The relative migration velocities of the ions of silver nitrate in
water, methyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol, and acetone, and in binary mixtures of these sol-
vents, together with the conductivity of such solutions." Amer. Chem. Journ., 36, 443
(1906).
65. JONES, BINGHAM, AND MCMASTER : "Ueber Leitfahigkeit und innere Reibung von Losungen
gewisser Salze in den Losungsmittelgemischen, Wasser, Methylalkohol, Athylalkohol, und
Aceton." Zeit. phys. Chem., 57, 193, 257 (1907).
66. JONES AND VEAZEY: "A possible explanation of the increase in viscosity which results when
the alcohols are mixed with water; and of the negative viscosity coefficients of certain
salts when dissolved in water." Amer. Chem. Journ., 37, 405 (1907).
67. JONES AND VEAZEY: "Die Leitfahigkeit und innere Reibung von Losungen gewisser Salze
in Wasser, Methylalkohol, Athylalkohol, Aceton, und binaren Gemischen dieser Losungs-
mittel." Zeit. phys. Chem., 61, 641 (1908).
68. JONES AND VEAZEY : " Die Leitfahigkeit und innere Reibung von Tetraathylammoniumjpdid
in Wasser, Methylalkohol, Athylalkohol, Nitrobenzol, und binaren Gemischen dieser
Losungsmittel." Zeit. phys. Chem., 62, 44 (1908).
69. KREIDER AND JONES: "The dissociation of electrolytes in non-aqueous solvents as deter-
mined by the conductivity and boiling-point methods." Amer. Chem. Journ., 45, 282
(1911).
70. JONES AND MAHIN: "The conductivity of solutions of lithium nitrate in ternary mixtures
of acetone, methyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol, and water; together with the viscosity and
fluidity of these mixtures." Amer. Chem. Journ., 41, 433 (1909).
71. JONES AND MAHIN: " Conductivity and viscosity of dilute solutions of lithium nitrate and
cadmium iodide in binary and ternary mixtures of acetone with methyl alcohol, ethyl
alcohol, and water." Zeit. phys. Chem., 69, 389 (1909).
72. SCHMIDT AND JONES: "Conductivity and viscosity in mixed solvents containing glycerol.
Amer. Chem. Journ., 42, 37 (1909).
73. GUY AND JONES: "Conductivity and viscosity in mixed solvents containing glycerol.
Amer. Chem. Journ., 46, 131 (1911).
202 BIBLIOGRAPHY.
74. KREIDEB AND JONES: "The conductivity of certain salts in methyl and ethyl alcohols at
high dilutions." Amer. Chem. Journ., 46, 574 (1911).
75. DAVIS and JONES: " Leitfahigkeits- und negative Viskozitiitskoeffizienten gewisser Rubid-
ium und Ammoniumsalze in Glycerin und in Gemischen von Glycerin mit Wasser von
25 to 75." Zeit. phys. Chem., 81, 68 (1912).
76. WIGHTMAN, DAVIS, HOLMES, and JONES: " Conductibilites et viscosites des solutions
d'iodure de potassium et d'iodure de sodium dans des melanges d'alcohol ethylique
et d'eau. Journ. Chim. Phys., 12, 385 (1914).
77. DAVIS, HUGHES, AND JONES: "Conductivity and viscosity of solutions of rubidium salts
in mixtures of acetone and water. Zeit. phys. Chem., 85, 513 (1913).
78. JONES: " Evidence bearing on the solvate theory of solution." Journ. Franklin Institute.
479, 677 (Nov. and Dec. 1913).
79. JONES and GUY: "Eine quantitative untersuchung der Absorptionsspektren von Losungen
mittels des Radiomikrometers." Ann. der Phys., 43, 555 (1914).
80. SHAEFFER, PAULUS, and JONES: "Die Anderung der Absorption des Lichtes durch Wasser
infolge der Gegenwart stark hydrierter Salze gemessen mit Hilfe des Radiomikrometers,"
Phys. Zeit., 15, 447 (1914).
81. WIGHTMAN, WIESEL, and JONES: "A preliminary study of the conductivity of certain
organic acids in absolute ethyl alcohol." Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc., 36, 2243 (1914).
82. JONES: " Absorptionsspektra und die Solvattheorie der Losungen." Zeit. Elektrochem.,20,
552 (1914).
MONOGRAPHS ON RESEARCHES DEALING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY WITH
SOLVATION, PUBLISHED BY THE CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON.
1. HYDRATES IN AQUEOUS SOLUTION: Evidence for the existence of hydrates in solution, their
approximate composition, and certain spectroscopic investigations bearing upon the
hydrate problem. By Harry C. Jones, with the assistance of F. H. Getman, H. P.
Bassett, L. McMaster, and H. S. Uhler. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publica-
tion No. 60 (1907).
2. CONDUCTIVITY AND VISCOSITY IN MIXED SOLVENTS: A study of the conductivity and vis-
cosity of certain electrolytes in water, methyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol, and acetone, and
in binary mixtures of these solvents. By Harry C. Jones and C. F. Lindsay, C. G.
Carroll, H. P. Bassett, E. C. Bingham, C. A. Rouiller, L. McMaster, and W. R. Veazey.
Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication No. 80 (1907).
3. THE ABSORPTION SPECTRA OF SOLUTIONS of certain salts of cobalt, nickel, copper, iron,
chromium, neodymium, praseodymium, and erbium in water, methyl alcohol, ethyl
alcohol, and acetone, and in mixtures of water with the other solvents. By Harry C.
Jones and John A. Anderson. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication No.
110 (1909).
4. A STUDY OF THE ABSORPTION SPECTRA of solutions of certain salts of potassium, cobalt,
nickel, copper, chromium, erbium, praseodymium, neodymium, and uranium, as affected
by chemical agents and by temperature. By Harry C. Jones and W. W. Strong.
Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication No. 130 (1910).
5. THE ABSORPTION SPECTRA OF SOLUTIONS OF COMPARATIVELY RARE SALTS, including those
of gadolinium, dysprosium, and samarium. The spectrophotography of certain chemical
reactions, and the effect of high temperature on the absorption spectra of non-aqueous
solutions. By Harry C. Jones and W. W. Strong. Carnegie Institution of Washington
Publication No. 160 (1911).
6. THE ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, DISSOCIATION, AND TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS OF
CONDUCTIVITY FROM TO 65 OF AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS OF A NUMBER OF SALTS AND
ORGANIC ACIDS. By Harry C. Jones. The experimental work by A. M. Clover, H. H.
Hosford, S. F. Howard, C. A. Jacobson, H. R. Kreider, E. J. Shaeffer, L. D. Smith,
A. Springer, Jr., A. P. West, G. F. White, E. P. Wightman, and L. G. Winston.
Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication No. 170 (1912).
7. THE FREEZING-POINT, CONDUCTIVITY, AND VISCOSITY OF SOLUTIONS OF CERTAIN ELECTRO-
LYTES IN WATER, METHYL ALCOHOL, ETHYL ALCOHOL, ACETONE, AND GLYCEROL, AND
IN MIXTURES OF THESE SOLVENTS WITH ONE ANOTHER. By Harry C. Jones and col-
laborators. (The seven collaborators in this monograph are Drs. C. M. Stine, J. N.
Pearce, H. R. Kreider, E. G. Mahin, M. R. Schmidt, J. Sam Guy, and P. B. Davis.)
Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication No. 180 (1913).
8. THE ABSORPTION SPECTRA OF SOLUTIONS AS AFFECTED BY TEMPERATURE AND BY DILU-
TION. A QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF ABSORPTION SPECTRA BY MEANS OF THE RADIO-
MICROMETER. By Harry C. Jones and J. Sam Guy. Carnegie Institution of Washington
Publication No. 190 (1913).
iibrar
DATE DUE
Tin JUr
1 7 196 ^
v'j;j 2 5 15;:
A 001227731 5