Talk:Solubility table

message: The compounds are arranged in alphabetical order, but the names aren't visible.  Also, there is no information on organic compounds in water.
At what temperature was the volume(100ml) of the water taken?  It varies with temperature.
Is the solubility in grams per 100 mL of water, or grams per 100 mL of solution?  This matters....  RobertAustin 11:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: names not visible

message: Should there be references/sources for these values? -- 12.4.81.145 14:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References? 

message: The article for NH4NO3 says solubility is 190g/100ml at 20 degrees Celsius, but this table says 192g/100ml.  Which is it?  Why isn't any of this cited?  Alex Dodge 07:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NH4NO3 

message: I am researching everything I can about sugar, which is sucrose. It's not in the solubility table, but salt (NaCI) is. What is going on here?17:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing compounds 

message: If you might notice it says inorganic compounds (ie. compounds without carbon). Sucrose contains carbon therefore it is not in the list.
Thanks for clarifying. I feel pretty dumb now! --Gabycs 00:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: Missing Compounds 

message: Well, these data are foolish.  If they list it by mass, then of course the heavier salts will bear a greatter "solubility".  But that's not what solubility should be; it should be a ratio of volums or at least moles. -lysdexia 19:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  dumb 

message: There's absolutely no use arguing about units (M or g/100cm3). The unit is given  in the description. This is because g/100cm3 is the most common unit found for "solubility" on the web. If you want it in molarity, do the calculation yourself. Or if you would like to benefit others like me, go do all the calculation and post it here, give the values beside with a slash in between, or make a separate table on your own. 
For accuracy, most of you should have heard it by now, that solubility, as well as solubility product constants, cannot be very accurate as very minor factors such as water purity or dissolved carbon dioxide may interfere. Common factors include:
water purity / dissolved CO2   (as for CaCO(sub>3</sub> due to common ion effect; NaOH by neutralization)
efflorescence (as CuSO4.5H2/ deliquescence (as for FeCl3)
decomposition in water (as for some sulfides and oxides)
formation of complexes (as CuCl2, most iron(III) salts)
temperature change when the substance dissolves in water (e.g. CaCl2, NaOH)
It is true that water changes its volume with temperature, but the effect is insignificant when compared to the above factors. Therefore many (including here - the solubility table) choose to use the unit g/100cm3. Moreover, here I have chosen this unit, as well as the values, together from the source. It is not to me to decide how to change the unit. Maybe those who gave these values measured water in cm3 rather than in g! Who knows! Keep the units. Don't change it. (And water mass does not change with temperature, unless it evaporates and slips away, an error of which can be experimentally eliminated fairly easily)
For heavier salts being more "soluble", this is indeed foolish. Solubility is determined by many factors, including lattice energy, stability of the ions in solution, amongst many others. Simply relating the solubility of a particular salt directly to how dense it is (not how heavy, as larger chunks are heavier than small crystals) reveals conceptual problems in the basic principles of not only chemistry, but general science. The idea of ratio of volumes is even absurd. 
For sugars and other organic compounds, if anyone finds them, add them to the list. I'm too busy with exams and projects right now. And if I do have time, I'll fix the references first. They don't seem to be precise enough, and I'm sorry coz I didn't realize the importance of citing sources when I was gathering the data. I'm planning to cite those I know where they come from, and probably deleting those without known sources or substituting with other values that have a source. Hopefully all this can be done in July, after my exams.
Anyway, hope this table's useful.
Thanks to everyone who helped.
Chiu frederick 10:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My comments on above comments 

message: The table should definitively use whatever units the actual sources use, you are exactly right that simply changing units without redoing the experiment is outright corruption of scientific data.
However..which source were you referring to that used g/100ml?  Was it that Chemicalc internal database?  I can only find sources that use mass ratios or molarities.  (Kaye & Laby use g/100g-solvent CRC 91st edition uses g/g-solution, and the IUPAC-NIST Solubility series is all over the place, but mostly using molarity and Ksp's)
This is relevant because it's unclear (to me at least) as to whether it's 100ml of solvent or 100ml of total solution.  When using mass ratios, for example, the CRC uses total-solution-mass as the denominator while Kaye & Laby use solvent-mass as the denominator, so since both of those are listed at the bottom of the page, I think it's reasonable to expect that volume would be ambiguous too, unless explicitly specified.  (And while mass vs volume of water is negligibly different, solvent vs solution makes a significant difference in both mass and volume).
But regardless, I looked at the history and whether you transcribed the majority of this table mostly by hand or not, thank you so very much for your significant contributions to humanity :)
--RProgrammer (talk) 11:42, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Where are those sources?

message: In order to alleviate the crystallization problem, I'm trying to avoid/minimise the formation of sodium carbonate crystal due to reaction with the CO2 presence in the atmosphere in a chlorine scrubber system.
Can anyone provide a list of Ksp values for carbonates such as Na2CO3 and K2CO3 at various temperatures similar to the solubility table? Most appreciated.
A202.128.229.48 05:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ksp of inorganic carbonates at various temps.  

message: Ksp values are not accurate for such soluble salts as Na2CO3 and K2CO3, but you can do the calculation:
Ksp = [Na+]2[CO32-]=4[CO32-]3=4[Na2CO3]3
the same for K2CO3
Chiu frederick 05:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: Ksp of inorganic carbonates at various temps.  

message: For the record to anyone interested, I believe this page gives the calculation Chiu mentioned: Solubility equilibrium
--RProgrammer (talk) 10:37, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: The calculation

message: Virtually every reference I find lists the solubility of a compound at 25 degrees - which makes sense aince most room temperatures are close to 25 Celsius.  Anyone else think we should had 25° to the list? Thricecube 07:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 25° C

message: The solubility of sodium chloride is absolutely wrong! Who accepted the change to the actual numbers???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.246.214.159 (talk) 20:57, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sodium chloride solubility wrong! 

message: 100g water will never dissolve 24g Xenon!
Wikipedia really isn't reliable.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.246.214.159 (talk) 21:07, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xenon solubility = wrong 

message: the solubility of caesium bromate at 0°C will most probably be 10 times higher! Where is the literature to these values???????????????
the hole solubility table is USELESS since you can't trust it (see sodium chloride as well)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.89.75.217 (talk) 12:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caesium bromate solubility wrong! 

message: 2012-06-20, Alex_I.
Measures are being made in weight per weight or per volume of water.
Thus any conversions to moles will add error to that data a bit.
Thus few tens of years ago negotiated g/100g unit must be the best.
The mentioned 190g vs 192 g of NH4NO3 - is not anyhow sensible difference (of 1%); when NH4NO3 dissolves in water, the temperature drops significantly, what requires some time to warm the solution back; many salts also do make a crystal hydrates after some time being in the solution, which also have a different solubility.
Thus sometimes there is a range of solubility, rather than just a single value.
Thus no any sensible difference between 100ml and 100g of water; really, no any; someone above also has mentioned some about purity and gases, so ...
And yes, I prefer to convert those numbers to moles, so it becomes moles/100g (while a normal well known unit would be mole/liter).
And I mostly look at moles to see what concentration I will get in a saturated solution.
Thus moles per something, is also a good unit to consider about (only if add it as an additional unit, but not to replace the g/100g).
The mostly interesting temperatures are :  0, 20, 100.
I would like to see those (or maybe more) columns of a different color in the background.
25° C column would spoil the organization of table :/ (I also have much data on 25°, but we must choose/keep/prefer the best structure of the table).
I put solubility of Xenon for 25°; you may remove it when will have for 20°; the source is Handbook of Nikolskiy vol 2, "Справочник химика. Том 2. Никольский ...".
Sucrose (sugar) must be moved to a separate table; or at least it was very unexpected to me to see it between inorganic compounds.
Do not hesitate to also add a qualitative words like "insoluble", "slightly soluble" there, where no defined data yet is.
Also a normal style would be to separate different results by comma, rather than just throw out any previous data.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cantregistermynick (talk • contribs) 14:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would a 25 °C column spoil the organization of the table? Klaas1978 (talk) 18:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units (and other things) 

message: Hey all,
sometime ago I found here the solubility of some Gadolinium compounds. However, today I wanted to have a look again but they had dissapeared! looking at the history of this article I found that it was removed between 6th of March and 23rd of April 2012. Why?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.82.231.70 (talk) 03:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gadolinium compounds removed around 23rd of April ?? 

message: I have data from the CRC handbook covering a lot of these substances. The values are sometimes approx. similar to the ones in the table, some other times, off quite a bit. I could do a major revamp of the whole table, and add the values with (as i think is best to remove obscurity) a reference tag at each value excerpt from CRC. This means that a lot of data will be redundant. What is the consensus on editing this table - should we keep the original numbers everywhere and add the referenced data in addition (lot of clutter!) or remove the old values and replace them with referenced data?? If this could be clarified, I could start doing this when time is available, as solubility charts like these are quite useful, also for me to have handy when needed. Cheers  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.240.5.82 (talk) 20:57, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely remove any old values that conflict with the sources you have and replace them with referenced data. As of right now, none of the values have inline citations, making them hard to verify, which seriously detracts from the usefulness of the page; having direct, inline references to a reliable source like the CRC handbook would be a major improvement. ʍw 22:56, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  CRC handbook data available - but what to do? 

message: Hello Wikipedia, thank you very much for this table. While looking at the solubilities for hydroxides in the table, I've noticed that the data/row for Zinc hydroxide is missing. Thanks. 203.202.246.34 (talk) 00:23, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some data missing 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Solubility table. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061207132126/http://food.oregonstate.edu/learn/sugar.html to http://food.oregonstate.edu/learn/sugar.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141109053519/http://www.chemfinder.com/ to http://www.chemfinder.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:17, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The 'N' and 'O' links in the contents section are not working. I think this is due to them being combined as "N & O" in the table below. Anyone know how to fix this?
Davination (talk) 05:04, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  N and O Links in Contents not working 

message: The solubility of calcium bicarbonate depends on the CO2 pressure. However, the values I found are:
0.00031 atm co2 1.02 mmol HCO3 0.165gr /kg
0.1116 atm co2 4.03 mmol HCO3  0.652 gr /kg
0.9684 atm co2 8.91 mmol HCO3  1.44 gr /kg
but I'm not sure I read the document well.
Frear, G. L., & Johnston, J. (1929). THE SOLUBILITY OF CALCIUM CARBONATE (CALCITE) IN CERTAIN AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS AT 25°1. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 51(7), 2082–2093. doi:10.1021/ja01382a014  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joaojorgemalveira (talk • contribs) 22:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, You're right. In principle, if you breathe on the solution, the solubility could change. It's pretty sensitive to pH, also. The lowest of the historical values does not correspond to the current average composition of the atmosphere, which has increased since 1929. Bcgirton (talk) 19:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "solubility" of bicarbonate is wrong 

message: The solubility in grams per 100 ml water shown here is a historical artifact, easy to compiled from the old literature, but useful mainly for prepping lab scale quantities of salt solutions. Using grams per 100 grams of water (which differs more at higher temperatures) would be a slight improvement. There's no solubility data for grams per 100 (or 1000) grams of solution, which is effectively the same for dilute solutions, but very different for these values with concentrated solutions like many of these are. Tables for molality and molarity should be added, as heavy atoms create the impression of disproportionately high solubility for salts of heavier cations or anions. 50.54.150.135 (talk) 18:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Molar values would be useful 

message: The links for D, E, F, G, J, K, N, O, Q, U, V, W, X are not working at all. Why? Can someone fix this massive error? Bernardirfan (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many links in the "Contents" section are not working at all