View source for Talk:Ammonia solution

{{Old peer review|reviewedname=Ammonium hydroxide|archive=1}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|
{{WikiProject Chemicals|importance=high}}
}}
==Untitled==
It's a valid topic, just needs someone to provide something useful Rjstott 11:39, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

==Grammar==
is it okay if we change the first paragraph a little?

"However, this term does give a fair description of how an ammonia solution behaves, and is commonly used even by scientists and engineers."

could be:

"The term '''aqueous ammonia''' gives a fair description of how an ammonia solution reacts to form ammonium cations & hydroxide anions when ammonia is introduced to water; furthermore it is still present in Scientific and Engineering lexica."

please review and submit your thoughts, thank you!
--[[User:Pillowmurder|Pillowmurder]] ([[User talk:Pillowmurder|talk]]) 19:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

==Production?==

What is the production of this? 
I mean, it isn't that hard to mix this with carbon dioxide to make ammonium carbonate,
but hey!
''What's this made of?'' 

From Curious scientist <sup>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonium_carbonate</sup>. 
(Up there is the link to Ammonium Carbonate in wikapediea)

== Why NH4OH, not NH5O?? ==

Why can't we write it as NH5O rather than NH4OH?? [[User:66.32.118.139|66.32.118.139]] 23:22, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Functional groups" are often left as-is when writing chemical formulas.  The ammonium group and the hydroxide group are well-known, and it's important to emphasize their presence.  Another example is HC2H3O2, where the initial H isn't just used to give H a subscript of 4, but left separate to indicate that it'll ionize giving H+ and C2H3O2-. [[User:Yath|Yath]] 01:25, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

== pH calculation ==

I looked at the "(equivalent to a pH of 11.63)" based on a pKb of 1.8×10^-5, and did the calculation myself.

At a pKb of 1.8x10^-5, the pOH should be: -log(1.8x10^-5) = 4.74.

Then, pH = 14-pOH, so 14-4.74 = 9.2552.

Am I missing something in my calculations? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Savonnn|Savonnn]] ([[User talk:Savonnn|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Savonnn|contribs]]) 01:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Savonnn -->
:Yep! pOH = p''K''<sub>b</sub> '''only if''' you have equal concentrations of unprotonated and protonated base. Hence a solution which contains equal concentrations of NH<sub>3</sub> and NH<sub>4</sub><sup>+</sup> will have a pH of 9.25. A 1&nbsp;M solution of ammonia which has no added acid has a pH which is higher, roughly 11.6. ''See also'' [[Buffer solution]], [[weak base]]. [[User:Physchim62|Physchim62]] [[User talk:Physchim62|(talk)]] 15:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

== molecular info table ==

Could someone add the table about ammonium hydroxide like the one on [[ammonia]] on the right side of the page.
thanks [[User:Ihafez|Ihafez]] ([[User talk:Ihafez|talk]]) 16:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

== Chembox ==

I added the Chembox, which I built in the Portuguese wikipedia using the structure of the Hungarian chembox and the words from the French chembox. Probably there are few data that must be trimmed. [[User:Albmont|Albmont]] ([[User talk:Albmont|talk]]) 12:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:Looks good, could you help with a translation of the text in .. Portuguese to English?  I'll try to add more identifiers in a bit (my script should be on its way there).  I also verified the CAS number with CAS.  Thanks!  --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 12:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:: What was left was Hungarian, not Portuguese. Maybe I can get something more with the other interwikis (French, Italian, Spanish - languages I can read quite well - and German and Dutch - languagen I'm not totally unfamiliar). But Hungarian is challenging even to language specialists - it's not even Indo-European! [[User:Albmont|Albmont]] ([[User talk:Albmont|talk]]) 18:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== Chembox / MP and BP ==
In the chembox the data for MP and BP has a reference. But the reference, as far as I can see, does not contain the data. The melting and boiling point are not explained in the text. Does the solid contain {{chem|NH|3}} and {{chem|H|2|O}} or does it really contain {{chem|NH|4|OH}}? And the same for the boiling point.  Encyclopedia of Inorganic Chemistry 2ed (Wiley, 2005), Nitrogen: Inorganic
Chemistry, p. 12 says: "Ammonium hydroxide {{chem|NH|4|+}}{{chem|OH|−}} is only found dissociated in solution, the undissociated form does not exist.". Christian75 15:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
:The data can be found by clicking on the "Phys.-Chem. Eigenschaften" link on the reference. The values are not explained in the reference, but I would assume the boiling point figures are the temperature at which the vapour pressure of ammonia reaches 1&nbsp;atm. As far as I know, water and ammonia do not form a constant boiling mixture (unlike water and hydrogen chloride, for example). The solid will be {{chem|NH|3}} and {{chem|H|2|O}} in some sort of hydrogen bonded array but, again, I don't have any firm information. [[User:Physchim62|Physchim62]] [[User talk:Physchim62|(talk)]] 16:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
::Thanks, found the data. But it sounds strange to have a melting point for a compound which does not exist. (Its like saying that the melting point for {{chem|AuF|7}} is equal the melting point for {{chem|AuF|5|·F|2}}) Christian75 19:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

== Just a Thought ==
I'm just wondering, but when, on the talk page, you write a chemical formula, why do you write it incorrectly? I'm not trying to provoke anyone, I'm just curious as to why this is a common problem. For example, in the second section's name, the author wrote "Why NH4OH?", but the correct formatting would be "Why NH<sub>4</sub>OH?" This is correct format for chemical formulas. Again, it's just a thought, so if you want to make an argument about it, then it's your loss, not mine.
:--[[User:Mast3rlinkx|Mast<span style="color:#0000ff;">3</span><span style="color:#3000d0;">r</span><span style="color:#6000a0;">l</span><span style="color:#900090;">i</span><span style="color:#b00060;">n</span><span style="color:#d00030;">k</span><span style="color:#ff0000;">x</span>]] ([[User talk:Mast3rlinkx|talk]]) 21:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
18:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC) ProfMad. Fair Comment! In my defense I don't know how to make the numbers smaller (ahhh! change fonts). Thus, firstly ignorance,& 2)continuation of said = sloth. Do I speak for the masses here??? 18:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)ProfMad18:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Profmad|Profmad]] ([[User talk:Profmad|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Profmad|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Title of the article ==

Ammonium hydroxide is commonly used but it doesn't seem to be an accurate name. There is only a small fraction of ammonium ions and hydroxide ions in NH3(aq). I think ammonia solution is more appropriate as the title. In google, "ammonium hydroxide" and "ammonia solution" have similar popularity. Both of them have more than 600,000 links. In that case, the more chemically accurate name is probably more desirable.[[Special:Contributions/218.215.13.102|218.215.13.102]] ([[User talk:218.215.13.102|talk]])  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 15:40, 23 March 2011 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== McDonald's ==

I think it would be good to expand the section about processing meat. Why it's used, how wide is it's use, do BK and Wendy's use it, is it in supermarket products? 
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505269_162-57368078/mcdonalds-scraps-controversial-beef-process/
[[User:Flight Risk|Flight Risk]] ([[User talk:Flight Risk|talk]]) 05:31, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

== Why not H3OOH? ==

Why don't we create an article about H3OOH as well, guys?? With exactly the same reasoning as in the archived peer review, that aqueous ammonia does contain some (indeed only some) NH4+ and OH- ions and should/could thus be called ammonium hydroxide, well then I advocate that we should start calling water hydronium/oxonium hydroxide as well... dûh! Should Wikipedia really promote ignorance? [[User:Beryllium-9|Beryllium-9]] ([[User talk:Beryllium-9|talk]]) 10:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
As a corollary, the least we should do is to call this article "Aqueous ammonia" and redirect Ammonium hydroxide to Aqueous ammonia. Can someone fix this? [[User:Beryllium-9|Beryllium-9]] ([[User talk:Beryllium-9|talk]]) 10:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

== Stoichiometry? ==

What we see is formulations like "a 3:1 mixture of ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) with hydrogen peroxide" (from article on [[Piranha solution]]). What does this say about stoichiometry? This suggests that "ammonium hydroxide" (NH4OH) should be used (if at all) only if it is really about ammonia (NH3) and water (H2O) in a 1:1 ratio, right? [[User:Beryllium-9|Beryllium-9]] ([[User talk:Beryllium-9|talk]]) 10:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

== Ammonium hydroxide gas -  what is that ? ==

The article about "pink slime"  (  some kind of processed beef residue )  refers to it being processed with ammonium hydroxide gas to kill germs.    What exactly is ammonium hydroxide gas supposed to be ??   A mixture of steam and ammonia ?   Or something else ?[[User:Eregli bob|Eregli bob]] ([[User talk:Eregli bob|talk]]) 18:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
:People get confused about ammonia.  Old fashioned and lay writings often refer to aqueous ammonia as ammonium hydroxide.  The problem in pink slime was corrected.--[[User:Smokefoot|Smokefoot]] ([[User talk:Smokefoot|talk]]) 02:05, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

== Basicity of ammonia in water ==

I think the number, 1.42% in that section should be 0.42%.
Check:
   0.0042^2 = 0.000018, the dissociation constant  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/212.60.196.82|212.60.196.82]] ([[User talk:212.60.196.82#top|talk]]) 04:14, 24 October 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I second this - shall be 0.42%, not 1.42%  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/46.188.11.41|46.188.11.41]] ([[User talk:46.188.11.41#top|talk]]) 21:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==Application==
* I suggest adding diazo printing ([[Whiteprint]]) in the applications section. --[[User:Dystopos|Dystopos]] ([[User talk:Dystopos|talk]])

== Furniture darkening ==
The last sentence in Furniture Darkening makes no sense. [[User:Roentie|Roentie]] ([[User talk:Roentie|talk]]) 12:51, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

==How ammonia cuts grease==
This section is missing any information about why ammonia is in cleaners.   [[User:Comfr|Comfr]] ([[User talk:Comfr|talk]]) 01:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

== We need 2D-skeletal with proper angles of ammonium hydroxide. ==

Thank you! --[[User:0dorkmann|0dorkmann]] ([[User talk:0dorkmann|talk]]) 07:31, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
:Well, the compound does not exist, so its probably not worth fretting about. [[Ammonium]] article has a nice picture of the cation. --[[User:Smokefoot|Smokefoot]] ([[User talk:Smokefoot|talk]]) 13:35, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
::Thank you! I was looking at the wrong article. --[[User:0dorkmann|0dorkmann]] ([[User talk:0dorkmann|talk]]) 02:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

== I always get a database error when I try to add [[Ammonium]] to the see also section ==

{{Archive top|status=resolved|result=It works now. I think the error was an empty XML citation block}}

If anyone could add this on my behalf that would be great. 👍 [[User:H44dyss9900|H44dyss9900]] ([[User talk:H44dyss9900|talk]]) 17:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

:This is no longer relevant, the issue is fixed [[User:H44dyss9900|H44dyss9900]] ([[User talk:H44dyss9900|talk]]) 12:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
{{Archive bottom}}

== Removed section on "Treatment of straw for cattle" ==
I removed the section on treating cattle feed, as the referenced article specifically states that anhydrous ammonia is used, not ammonia solution. (A previous editor had added a statement in the section contradicting the existing text; I removed that too.) This is what was removed:
<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext">
=== Treatment of straw for cattle ===
Ammonia solution is used to treat straw, producing "ammoniated straw" making it more edible for [[cattle]].<ref>{{cite web | url=https://u.osu.edu/beef/2007/06/27/is-it-bedding-or-is-it-feed/ | title=Is it Bedding or is it Feed? &#124; Ohio BEEF Cattle Letter}}</ref>

Ammonia solution is not used for the treatment of straw and other stover, Anhydrous Ammonia, or NH3 is used, ammoniating stover raises the protein content, and makes the feed more palatable.
</syntaxhighlight>
[[User:Bramblefoot12|Bramblefoot12]] ([[User talk:Bramblefoot12|talk]]) 13:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)