Skip to main content
ExamExplained
WA · Chemistry
Chemistry study scene
§-Syllabus dot point
WAChemistrySyllabus dot point

How can we predict which way a reaction not yet at equilibrium will shift to reach equilibrium?

Calculate the reaction quotient Q and compare it with Kc to predict the direction in which a reaction will proceed to reach equilibrium

A focused answer to the WACE Year 12 Chemistry dot point on the reaction quotient, how Q is calculated and compared with Kc to predict the direction of net reaction, with a worked example and common exam mistakes.

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

What this dot point is asking

The equilibrium constant KcK_c describes the ratio of product to reactant concentrations only when a system is at equilibrium. But a real mixture may not start at equilibrium. The reaction quotient QQ lets you test where a system sits relative to equilibrium and predict the direction of net change.

For the general reaction

aA+bBcC+dDa\text{A} + b\text{B} \rightleftharpoons c\text{C} + d\text{D}

both have the form

Q=[C]c[D]d[A]a[B]bQ = \frac{[\text{C}]^c[\text{D}]^d}{[\text{A}]^a[\text{B}]^b}

The difference is that KcK_c uses equilibrium concentrations and QQ uses the actual concentrations at the moment you are interested in.

Comparing Q with Kc

The system always shifts in the direction that brings QQ towards KcK_c.

  • Q<KcQ < K_c: there are too few products relative to reactants. The forward reaction is favoured; the reaction proceeds to the right, making more product until QQ rises to equal KcK_c.
  • Q>KcQ > K_c: there are too many products. The reverse reaction is favoured; the reaction proceeds to the left, consuming product until QQ falls to equal KcK_c.
  • Q=KcQ = K_c: the system is already at equilibrium and there is no net change.

Why this is useful

The reaction quotient lets you do three things the equilibrium constant alone cannot. First, predict the direction of reaction for any starting mixture. Second, decide whether adding more of a substance will cause net forward or reverse change. Third, it underpins the solubility comparison (QQ versus KspK_{sp}) used to predict precipitation, so the same logic carries across the whole equilibrium topic.

Handling gases, solids and the units

When the question gives amounts in moles, always divide by the volume to get concentrations before substituting, exactly as for KcK_c itself; the only time you can skip this is when the total moles of gas are equal on both sides, so the volume cancels. Pure solids and pure liquids are left out of QQ just as they are left out of KcK_c, because their effective concentration is constant. For a heterogeneous equilibrium such as CaCO3(s)CaO(s)+CO2(g)\text{CaCO}_3(s) \rightleftharpoons \text{CaO}(s) + \text{CO}_2(g), the quotient is simply Q=[CO2]Q = [\text{CO}_2], and comparing it with KcK_c predicts whether more carbonate decomposes or more carbon dioxide is reabsorbed.

Q for solubility: a preview

The same comparison drives precipitation prediction in the solubility topic. There the quotient is called the ionic product, written with the same ion-concentration form as KspK_{sp}. If the ionic product exceeds KspK_{sp} the solution is supersaturated and a precipitate forms (the system shifts to consume ions); if it is below KspK_{sp} no precipitate forms. Recognising that "QQ versus KK" is a single unifying idea across gaseous equilibria, acid ionisation and solubility is one of the higher-order links WACE rewards.

Connecting to Le Chatelier

The reaction quotient gives a quantitative version of Le Chatelier's principle. When you add reactant, QQ drops below KcK_c, so the system shifts forward; when you add product, QQ rises above KcK_c, so it shifts in reverse. The two ideas describe the same behaviour, but QQ lets you put numbers to the prediction.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of SCSA exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

WACE 20216 marksFor N2(g)+3H2(g)2NH3(g)\text{N}_2(g) + 3\text{H}_2(g) \rightleftharpoons 2\text{NH}_3(g), Kc=0.50K_c = 0.50 at a given temperature. A 2.0 L2.0\ \text{L} vessel contains 0.40 mol N20.40\ \text{mol}\ \text{N}_2, 0.60 mol H20.60\ \text{mol}\ \text{H}_2 and 0.20 mol NH30.20\ \text{mol}\ \text{NH}_3. (a) Calculate QQ. (b) Determine the direction of net reaction. (c) State what happens to QQ and KcK_c as the system moves to equilibrium.
Show worked answer →

A 6 mark question rewards converting to concentration, the correct QQ, and the comparison.

(a) Convert to concentration (divide moles by 2.0 L2.0\ \text{L}): [N2]=0.20[\text{N}_2] = 0.20, [H2]=0.30[\text{H}_2] = 0.30, [NH3]=0.10 mol L1[\text{NH}_3] = 0.10\ \text{mol L}^{-1}.

Q=[NH3]2[N2][H2]3=(0.10)2(0.20)(0.30)3=0.010(0.20)(0.027)=0.0100.0054=1.85.Q = \frac{[\text{NH}_3]^2}{[\text{N}_2][\text{H}_2]^3} = \frac{(0.10)^2}{(0.20)(0.30)^3} = \frac{0.010}{(0.20)(0.027)} = \frac{0.010}{0.0054} = 1.85.

(b) Q=1.85>Kc=0.50Q = 1.85 > K_c = 0.50, so there is too much product; the net reaction proceeds in the reverse direction (to the left), decomposing NH3\text{NH}_3.

(c) As the reverse reaction proceeds, [NH3][\text{NH}_3] falls and reactant concentrations rise, so QQ decreases until it reaches 0.500.50. KcK_c stays at 0.500.50 because the temperature is unchanged.

Markers reward concentrations (not moles), Q=1.85Q = 1.85, the reverse direction, and QKcQ \rightarrow K_c with KcK_c constant.

WACE 20234 marksExplain how comparing the reaction quotient QQ with the equilibrium constant KcK_c provides a quantitative version of Le Chatelier's principle when a reactant is added to a system at equilibrium.
Show worked answer →

A 4 mark answer needs the link between adding a reactant, the effect on QQ, and the predicted shift.

A system at equilibrium has Q=KcQ = K_c. Adding a reactant increases the denominator of the QQ expression, so QQ instantly falls below KcK_c (Q<KcQ < K_c). The rule "net reaction moves in the direction that brings QQ back to KcK_c" then predicts the forward reaction, consuming the added reactant and forming more product until QQ rises back to KcK_c.

This is exactly what Le Chatelier's principle predicts qualitatively (the system opposes the added reactant by shifting right), but the QQ versus KcK_c comparison expresses it numerically and shows why equilibrium is restored at the same KcK_c.

Markers reward QQ falling below KcK_c on adding reactant, the forward shift, and the connection to Le Chatelier with KcK_c unchanged.

ExamExplained