Lably
Skip to content

Le Chatelier's principle

Principle to predict effects of a change in conditions on a chemical equilibrium

  • 14 min read
  • 7 chapters
  • 3 labs on Lably

Learn it on Lably

The principle is named after French chemist Henry Louis Le Chatelier, who enunciated the principle in 1884 by extending the reasoning from the Van 't Hoff relation of how temperature variations changes the equilibrium to the variations of pressure and what's now called chemical potential, and sometimes also credited to Karl Ferdinand Braun, who discovered it independently in 1887. It can be defined as:

If the equilibrium of a system is disturbed by a change in one or more of the determining factors (as temperature, pressure, or concentration) the system tends to adjust itself to a new equilibrium by counteracting as far as possible the effect of the change

— Le Chatelier's principle, Merriam-Webster Dictionary

In scenarios outside thermodynamic equilibrium, there can arise phenomena in contradiction to an over-general statement of Le Chatelier's principle.

Le Chatelier's principle is sometimes alluded to in discussions of topics other than thermodynamics.

Thermodynamic statement

The Le Chatelier–Braun principle analyzes the qualitative behaviour of a thermodynamic system when a particular one of its externally controlled state variables, say L, changes by an amount ΔL, the 'driving change', causing a change δiM, the 'response of prime interest', in its conjugate state variable M, all other externally controlled state variables remaining constant. The response illustrates 'moderation' in ways evident in two related thermodynamic equilibria. Also as a necessary part of the scenario, there is some particular auxiliary 'moderating' state variable X, with its conjugate state variable Y. For this to be of interest, the 'moderating' variable X must undergo a change ΔX≠0 or δX≠0 in some part of the experimental protocol; this can be either by imposition of a change ΔY, or with the holding of Y constant, written δY=0. For the principle to hold with full generality, X must be extensive or intensive accordingly as M is so. To give this scenario physical meaning, the 'driving' variable and the 'moderating' variable must be subject to separate independent experimental controls and measurements.

Explicit statement

The principle can be stated in two ways which are formally different but substantially equivalent, and, in a sense, mutually 'reciprocal'. The two ways illustrate the Maxwell relations, and the stability of thermodynamic equilibrium according to the second law of thermodynamics, evident as the spread of energy amongst the state variables of the system in response to an imposed change.

The two ways of statement differ in their experimental protocols. They share an index protocol (denoted Pi), which may be described as 'changed driver, moderation permitted'. Along with the driver change ΔL, it imposes a constant Y, with δiY=0, and allows the uncontrolled 'moderating' variable response δiX, along with the 'index' response of interest δiM.

The two ways of statement differ in their respective compared protocols. One form of compared protocol posits 'changed driver, no moderation' (denoted Pn). The other form of compared protocol posits 'fixed driver, imposed moderation' (denoted Pf.)

Forced 'driver' change, free or fixed 'moderation'

This way compares Pi with Pn, to compare the effects of the imposed the change ΔL with and without moderation. The protocol Pn prevents 'moderation' by enforcing that ΔX=0 through an adjustment ΔY, and it observes the 'no-moderation' response ΔM. Provided that the observed response is indeed that δiX≠0, then the principle states that |δiM|<|ΔM|.

In other words, change in the 'moderating' state variable X moderates the effect of the driving change in L on the responding conjugate variable M.

Forcedly changed or fixed 'driver', respectively free or forced 'moderation'

This way also uses two experimental protocols, Pi and Pf, to compare the index effect δiM with the effect δfM of 'moderation' alone. The index protocol Pi is executed first; the response of prime interest, δiM, is observed, and the response ΔX of the 'moderating' variable is also measured. With that knowledge, then the fixed driver, imposed moderation protocol Pf enforces that ΔL=0, with the driving variable L held fixed; the protocol also, through an adjustment ΔfY, imposes a change ΔX (learnt from the just previous measurement) in the 'moderating' variable, and measures the change δfM. Provided that the 'moderated' response is indeed that ΔX≠0, then the principle states that the signs of δiM and δfM are opposite.

In other words, change in the 'moderating' state variable X opposes the effect of the driving change in L on the responding conjugate variable M.

Sign in to keep reading

6 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Chemistry