Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Noob gets started

Noob gets started

aga - 25-3-2014 at 15:59

Hi All.

New Noo Noob announcement :

I made a fume cupboard and today started with battery acid and copper to make Copper Sulphate (solution) - reaction (#2) happening as i type.

5V works better than 12V so far (no heating or copper Cathode going all bonkers). The 14V flavour was boiling the acid solution out of the jar, and made the cathode all fluffy (three times the original diameter).

Last night i got the hang of moles and molarity. Thanks Wiki !

Plenty of Stuff on order, but i would appreciate a Pointer from a Guru as to where to look next, as in what to Learn next in this amazing field of Chemistry.

Loving it lots. Happy days !

elementcollector1 - 25-3-2014 at 16:04

Are you doing electroplating? I'm confused.
Anyway, why don't you look into single-displacement, or learn more about the various atomic theories?

bismuthate - 25-3-2014 at 16:10

I personaly love chemguide, it's great for learning chemistry.
http://www.chemguide.co.uk/

blogfast25 - 26-3-2014 at 08:02

Quote: Originally posted by aga

I made a fume cupboard

Welcome!

Can you elaborate on your fume hood, with photos perhaps?

MrHomeScientist - 26-3-2014 at 08:33

The usual rule of thumb for just about any electrolysis experiment is to not go above 6V. Exceeding this tends to erode the electrodes very quickly and as you saw, it causes excessive heating of the solution!

Fume Cupboard

aga - 26-3-2014 at 12:21

This is my 'work area' which is basically a fume cupboard with a PC fan at the top/back, a water-tight silicone-sealed glass base-tray, and a sliding front door (top half is fixed+sealed), and an LED lighting strip at the top.

It's based on the IKEA 'Albert' Book Shelving Unit (£13), but i live in Spain, and they only had the metal equivalent, which was 10 euros, so i used two, but 1 would have been ok.

The shelves i moved around to make a work-height area, and then filled it in with hardboard at the back & sides, then got some glass pieces cut to make the base-tray and front sliding doors.
It's all sealed with silicone sealant wherever i thought it was needed.

Although small, it works well for me, and fits neatly into a corner my 3m x 2m tin shed (which also has an electronics area, general engineering section, several model helis and an experimental solar power plant on 1 wall).

The beautiful blue stuff is my CuSO4 product from my very first experiment yesterday. Seems i got carried away, as there's stacks of the stuff !

Steam - 26-3-2014 at 14:31

Very nice aga, good to see someone making the investment to have a fume hood!
Does the PC fan vent somewhere, or does it just recirculate the air within the hood?

subsecret - 26-3-2014 at 16:24

Even if the fan does exhaust somewhere else, it's still pretty small. I recommend that you invest in a more powerful fan; perhaps you could find an old furnace blower somewhere. A powerful fan is especially important if you're going to work with more volatile materials (many organic solvents, etc), poisonous gases, and the like.

Good work, have fun in the lab.

NeonPulse - 26-3-2014 at 21:57

good job. It is great to see people taking an interest in chemistry. You could probably use another fan or two in that unit as a heavy fume producing reaction will fill that space in no time. some fumes and gasses may also sink to the bottom of the unit making it harder to remove them with one fan. A bathroom fan would clear that very fast which is what you would want, especially with some of the more harmful fumes and gasses produced in some reactions. to test how fast it takes to clear just put some baby powder in your hands and clap inside the unit. You should get a pretty good idea of how efficiently it works.

Another fun and easy project is to make an electric stirrer plate. Cheap, easy to make and they are very useful. After making mine i wondered how i ever did without it.
So much cheaper than buying one.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 01:45

Thanks for all of the suggestions peeps.

The 'fume cupboard' cost about 60 euros in all, so it wasn't a Huge investment. The main cost was the Glass, which could have been scrounged from garbage, but i was impatient, plus my glass-cutting skills are non-existent.

I guess adding more PC fans at different heights would be the cheapest way to increase the venting, and having one low down might help with heavier-than-air fumes (never thought about that when i was building it).

The fan vents thru a tube to the Outside World, and the nearest occupied house is about 400m away.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 02:05

What would be really Great would be if you guys could suggest (in order) what i should learn next, and what experiments to do.

So far is :-

Atomic structure
Mixtures/compounds
Separation
Bonding types
Equations (inc balanced)
Calculating Molarity
Electrolysis

What i *think* i'll learn to do next (depending on your suggestions) is :-
Make/purify the 3 basic acids
Titration (to see what the conc really is)

What i know i'm missing is *why* chem X reacts with chem Y in such a way as to make chems V and W, and also how to determine if that will be exothermic or not.

Sorry if this way to basic for you guys (i'm starting out with a 31 year old O level in chemistry, and wasn't born all-knowing !)

blogfast25 - 27-3-2014 at 06:18

Nice fume cupboard.

Why chemicals react with each other is essentially a matter of changes in Gibbs Free Energy, so it's a good place to start, e.g.:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/chemical/gibbspon...

Zyklon-A - 27-3-2014 at 06:39

Another good place to understand Gibbs Free Energy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPjMPeU5OeM

blogfast25 - 27-3-2014 at 09:30

Zb:

Good video, although his 'ball on a slide' is misleading: the total energy is in fact unchanged (potential energy is simply converted a 100 % to kinetic energy).

Also, the term 'spontaneous' is a misleading term: C + O2 === > CO2 has a Delta G << 0 but coal doesn't 'spontaneously' catch fire.

[Edited on 27-3-2014 by blogfast25]

DraconicAcid - 27-3-2014 at 09:37

Quote: Originally posted by aga

What i *think* i'll learn to do next (depending on your suggestions) is :-
Make/purify the 3 basic acids

I think it would be more interesting to make some acidic acids, actually.

Actually, since you've got copper(II) sulphate, get some ammonia and make the tetrammine complex. It's pretty.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 10:26

Groovy ! Thanks for the suggestions and links.

I will definitely follow them up tomorrow.

In the meantime, i seem to have about 2 litres of CuSO4 solution, and growing the crystals was a bit boring to watch, so ....

I put 150ml CuSO4 solution in a pyrex jug, added some salt and some aluminium foil.
It fizzed a bit, and went up to 68 degrees for a short time, so i then kept adding aluminium in a very OCD fashion to keep the fizzing happening.

Now i seem to have some of my copper back, and a layer of Purest Brown Sludge which i'll filter and taste, and hopefully call Al2SO3.

Electrolysis seemed easy, so i did it again with just some water, a bit of salt, and copper tube electrodes.
This has made puke green frog spawn. It might be Cu(OH)2, but i'll wait until Summer and see if any tadpoles hatch.

Chemistry is great fun !

aga - 27-3-2014 at 10:36

> some acidic acids

Doh!

Gibbs looks like maths again.
May take me a day or two to get my head around it.

Tetraamminecopper(II) sulfate looks pretty, but given the method to produce it, was it discovered by someone making copper sulphate, getting drunk every night, repeatedly peeing all over a pile of hay stacked on top of it, then spilling their moonshine whiskey into the mix a few months later ?

[Edited on 27-3-2014 by aga]

Zyklon-A - 27-3-2014 at 10:40

blogfast25 , good point, I didn't notice that.

aga, nice fume-hood, I got a powerful fan at Home Depot for about $15-20, I don't have a fume-hood, but if I did make one that would be the fan I would use.
I will post a picture of it, and a link (if I can find it,) when I get home. It would be much more powerful than even several computer fans.

blogfast25 - 27-3-2014 at 13:03

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Gibbs looks like maths again.

No serious science without math, I'm afraid.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 13:57

Oh well.
I'd best get my calculator head on then.

I just went back to have a look at the bowl of Purest Brown, and it's all copper-ish.
Maybe i overdid the aluminium. All the blue colour has gone from the solution.

Funny thing - the 'pile' of brown sludge has formed in a hemisphere, rather than just a layer fitting the sides of the jar.

Can't check it's pH yet, as no indicator has arrived yet (i got a load of stuff on order).
I'll buy some red cabbage tomorrow and test it.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 14:26

That reminds me.

I've randomly bought some stuff, in the hope that it'll come in handy.

It takes a week, or maybe two, for anything to arrive in Spain, no matter where it comes from (including Spain) so Distance is no object.

What malarky should a noob like me be buying ?

Zyklon-A - 27-3-2014 at 14:28

Have a look at this thread for some idea's:http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=9890

aga - 27-3-2014 at 15:27

OK. So a -ve delta Gibbs result predicts that a reaction will happen at STP and without external energy input.

So far so good.

The next bit is less easy.
For A +B <-> C= D, delta G = Standard Free Energy Change +2.303 RT log10 etc, then it gets worse, using [C][D] over [A][B].

Sorry to be a complete 'tard, but this is appears as madness, which means that i do not understand the notation, or it's implications.

If A is a Womble and B is a Chestnut, then [A] (i assume) means Womble Concentration (in what units ? moles ?) multiplied by Chestnut concentration.

(Chestnutride of Womble was the required product.)

R and T or RT are unexplained, so unless it's Radio Telegraph, er, what ? Then there's cal and mol, cal and mol of which bit ?

I apologise once again for my total lack of anything, but Maths should really be more explicit.

I knew i should have looked at this tomorrow.

The_Davster - 27-3-2014 at 15:52

Sorry, I have to disagree with the above. Good chemical intuition is far more important than gibbs free energy calculations when deciding if things will react. The required data for those calculations are not always available. For that, only lots of reading and experience will do. I suggest an older edition practical organic chemistry book, for example
rushim.ru/books/praktikum/Mann.pdf‎

aga - 27-3-2014 at 16:09

Random thought :

Are there reactions NOT involving hydrogen and oxygen ?
Is that a distinctly separate branch of chemistry ?

Just that it occurred to me that a water-less world would develop differently, and an environment totally devoid of hydrogen would be different again.

copperastic - 27-3-2014 at 16:12

Aga Sodium and chlorine doesn't involve oxygen or hydrogen.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 16:18

Well, The_Davster, i tend to agree, despite me knowing just about nothing.

I say that because the Gibbs calculations will certainly have come from observed reactions rather than Divine Knowledge.
All such derived formulae have definite Limits.

To rely on derived data, and Only do experiments on such derived equations places a Limit on what was originally oddballs mixing stuff up and seeing what happens.

Simply repeating their Cutting Edge research and deriving formulae isn't quite the same, but i feel that understanding the maths is valuable.

Personally i'll do the 'see what happens', but i'd like some understanding as well.

aga - 27-3-2014 at 16:20

Quote: Originally posted by copperastic

Aga Sodium and chlorine doesn't involve oxygen or hydrogen.

Well said Space Traveller.

Zyklon-A - 27-3-2014 at 17:35

I don't have access to a camera at the moment, but my fan looks like this:
Also, I couldn't find a link for the exact one I have either, but if you look at Home Depot, you should find one for a good price.

[Edited on 28-3-2014 by Zyklonb]

blogfast25 - 28-3-2014 at 05:43

@aga:

The thermodynamics of the reaction are important to work out whether or not a planned reaction can proceed or not (but it says NOTHING about practical conditions in which it may succeed).

Time and time again beginners come up with schemes that CAN'T fly because they simply aren't thermodynamically viable (ΔG > 0, cannot proceed).

For instance, a few days ago someone suggested to use zinc to reduce SiO2, acc.:

SiO2 + 2 Zn === > Si + 2 ZnO

Well, this reaction is strongly endoenergetic (ΔG > 0) and zinc cannot reduce silicon dioxide.

We'll gradually teach you how to make these calculations, just don't get too hung up on it for now. Trust me: it's much simpler than you imagine.

[Edited on 28-3-2014 by blogfast25]

MrHomeScientist - 28-3-2014 at 06:13

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Now i seem to have some of my copper back, and a layer of Purest Brown Sludge which i'll filter and taste, and hopefully call Al2SO3.

I really hope you don't actually plan to taste anything you make in the lab. That's about the worst thing you could do.

The brown sludge is fine copper powder - filter, dry, and store it for future use! The fact that the solution lost all its blue color means that you reacted (nearly) all of the copper sulfate into copper metal and aluminum sulfate. Al₂(SO₄)₃ is fairly soluble, so will likely remain in solution with the quantities you're using. Probably a good idea to rinse your copper powder with water a few times to wash away any impurities.

I'll second the recommendation to get a bigger exhaust fan for your hood. That little PC fan won't be able to handle smoke/fumes from a reaction gone out of hand, which is when you need it most. Try making a small potassium nitrate & sugar smoke bomb and setting it off in the hood and watch what happens. Besides a bigger fan, one that is explosion-proof is also a necessity if you ever plan on working with flammable vapors. A baffle system along the back wall will help to direct both heavy and light gases into the exhaust duct. There's lots of threads on fume hood construction around here, so search around.

Also a note of caution: you use a lot of words like "randomly" and "OCD" combining of chemicals. This is not the way to approach chemistry, and can get you into some serious trouble. You've always got to be careful, and plan things out thoroughly beforehand. When I do an experiment, I write down the equation for the reaction I'm trying and think about any possible side reactions that can happen. Plan for gas evolution, temperature rise/fall, hazardous byproducts, etc. all before you step into the lab.
Don't get me wrong - it's great that you're so enthusiastic about chemistry! Just try to temper your excitement with some forethought and caution. Chemistry is tons of fun, and can be done safely as long as you respect your chemicals.

blogfast25 - 28-3-2014 at 06:55

Yes, safety first. Chemistry can be a seriously volatile mistress!

Try starting with A-level experiments, many of which can be found on the net and which come with complete, idiot proof instructions, including safety guidelines. They tend to be highly educational and totally safe. After that you can become 'creative'.

aga - 28-3-2014 at 13:13

@Señor Blogfast25

SiO2 + 2 Zn === > Si + 2 ZnO

Gibbs says it can't work (at STP at least)

Please demonstrate, using the Gibbs formulae, why it will not.

You will be educating, and can credit yourself with explaining the Gibbs Comobulation to me at least.

@MrHomeScientist
Naturally my toungue will not be involved in the tasting.

Cheers for the explanation of what i made, and what to do with it.

Please explain how this is known : "Al2(SO4)3 is fairly soluble"
Is there a calculation that can predict that ?

Safety is my prime concern, as i am not dedicated enough to discover how sulphuric acid Feels in my eyes.
That's why i made a 'safe area' before i started, and use thick gloves and a full face visor (goggles feel bad, and glasses-type protectors feel too insecure).

Side note : Red Cabbage juice works as a broad spectrum pH indicator.
I whizzed some up with hot water, filtered it and then squirted it into all sorts of solutions.
Goes different colours nicely, relative to pH.

Apparently a Package has arrived at the P.O., so inwards and spinwise !

blogfast25 - 28-3-2014 at 14:08

@aga:

To calculate the Gibbs Free Energy of a hypothetical reaction we use Hess’ Law. Hess’ Law declares that Gibbs Free Energy is a so-called State Function. If we go from State 1 (the left hand side of the equation) to State 2 (the right hand side of the equation) then it doesn’t matter how we get from left to right: the change in Gibbs Free Energy (ΔG) is always the same and path-independent.

This provides calculators with a handy device: just break down the reaction into ‘sub reactions’ for which ΔG (or ΔH, depending on which you want to calculate) are known and then simply add them up. In the case of the SiO2 + Zn reaction:

Sub reaction 1: SiO2 → Si + O2
This is the opposite of the formation reaction of SiO2 and has the same value but the opposite sign: ΔH = + 905.5 kJ/mol. This value comes from the NIST Webbook.

Sub reaction 2: Zn + ½ O2 → ZnO
This is the formation reaction of ZnO and its value for ΔH = - 350.5 kJ/mol (also NIST Webook)

Now if we add up 1 of Sub reaction 1 and 2 of Sub reaction 2, we have indeed our original reaction.

Hess then allows to simply add the ΔH values, so that for the original reaction we obtain:
ΔH = + 905.5 + 2 x ( - 350.5) = + 204.5 kJ/mol, so: strongly endothermic.

I could have used values for ΔG instead but didn’t have them at hand. Values for ΔH and ΔG for countless simple reactions can be found in a myriad of tables and books and can be used to construct paths that correspond to reactions one want to explore.

[Edited on 28-3-2014 by blogfast25]

aga - 29-3-2014 at 01:24

Thanks blogfast25.

I remember that Sodium fizzes about on water, so that must be a reaction with a -ve Gibbs value.

Seems the reaction is 2Na + 2H2O -> 2NaOH + H2 and the ΔH is -368.6kJ

(found in the workings of an example discovered by googling)

So, as the ΔH is -ve, this reaction will take place with no external energy input.

Somehow i failed to get the Reaction Search NIST page to work.
Using 'sodium' or 'Na' in the reactants fields always says 'no data available'.

What should i be typing in to find the thermochemical data for this particular reaction ?

I expect the ΔH for Ca + H2O will be a bigger (absolute) -ve number, as i remember a 10 litre glass bowl of water shattering when a blob of Ca was added.

Is there a 'threshold' ΔH at which a reaction is considered dangerous, as in it could well go pop ?

MrHomeScientist - 29-3-2014 at 04:56

For solubilities, the wiki solubility table is a handy resource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solubility_table

It's got a lot of holes, and some entries have been proven to be incorrect by people on this forum, but for the most part it's a great place to start.

Quote:

I expect the ΔH for Ca + H2O will be a bigger (absolute) -ve number, as i remember a 10 litre glass bowl of water shattering when a blob of Ca was added.

Calcium is much less reactive than sodium. It will fizz vigorously when added to water, but won't come close to being explosive whereas sodium often can. If it was indeed calcium that shattered a bowl, I'd guess it was from the heat generated thermally shocking the glass.

blogfast25 - 29-3-2014 at 05:42

NIST webbook, try this page:

http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/name-ser.html

Insert a VALID chemical formula in the box and tick 'Condensed phase', then press 'Search'. If available for your choice of compound the Standard Heat (Enthalpy) of Formation will show up, along with other thermochemical data (that shouldn't concern you right now). Note that conventionally the Heats of Formation of pure, uncompounded elements is set at 0 kJ/mol.

As regards your example, depending on the data you used, it may be correct only for formation of solid NaOH, not a solution of NaOH. In the real world when Na reacts with water a solution of NaOH is formed. We notate this as:

Na(s) + H2O(l) === > NaOH(aq) + 1/2 H2(g)

...where the bracket indicates s = solid, l = liquid, g = gas, aq = watery solution.

If you intended to find the value for NaOH(aq) then the relevant values must be used for NaOH(aq), not NaOH(s).

The point you make about calcium is an example of how NOT to make empirical observations and conclusions: w/o knowing for instance just how much Ca was used it is impossible to draw any valid conclusions re. Delta H. To make a comparison with Na, identical quantities would have to be used in otherwise also identical conditions. It's the oldest rule in the book: 'to observe a change objectively, only change one thing at a time'.

Much of science is the 'art' of observation and by default we're not good at it due to all kinds of factors that want to fool our brain. As you go along you should get better at observing things carefully and objectively.

[Edited on 29-3-2014 by blogfast25]

aga - 29-3-2014 at 08:25

Excellent !

Thanks very much for the pointers folks.

It's really good to start to see part of the Mountain of stuff to learn.

I am probably wrong about the Ca mentioned above.
Could well have been something else much more reactive.

The lasting memory was the look on the chem teacher's face as large volumes of water cascaded all over the place, while a madly fizzing, fuming and burning blob of stuff skated around in the puddle on the floor.

blogfast25 - 29-3-2014 at 09:57

Quote: Originally posted by aga

The lasting memory was the look on the chem teacher's face as large volumes of water cascaded all over the place, while a madly fizzing, fuming and burning blob of stuff skated around in the puddle on the floor.

Another chem demonstrator who didn't know what he was doing. Demos are notoriously difficult to carry off without carefully prepping/rehearsing.

Chemistry_Keegan - 29-3-2014 at 10:24

Quote: Originally posted by aga

I remember a ten litre glass bowl of water shattering when a blob of calcium was added.

You may be thinking of cesium. Cesium is an alkaline metal, which is the first group on the periodic table, with the exception of hydrogen. Sodium is also in that group, and as you go down it, the metals react more and more violently with water. The only one that has never been tested is francium, because it is so radioactive that it is too difficult and dangerous to produce significant quantities of. Presumably, it would react even more violently then cesium, but that is still under debate. Take a look at this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uixxJtJPVXk

blogfast25 - 29-3-2014 at 11:13

One thing that would be interesting to do is to make this comparison in the absence of air (oxygen), as it would prevent the hydrogen from catching fire. Here the comparison, however interesting, is skewed because we are effectively observing two reactions at once (at least from K downwards):

M(s) + H2O(s) === > M+(aq) + OH-(aq) + 1/2 H2(g)

And H2(g) + 1/2 O2(g) === > H2O(g)

That makes the K, Rb and Cs reactions 'unfairly' more energetic.

[Edited on 29-3-2014 by blogfast25]

aga - 29-3-2014 at 12:35

Haaaaahahahahaa !

Cheers Chemistry_Keegan

That video is *exactly* as i remember what happened, including the big glass bowl, and it's fate !

I think it was sodium first, then cesium.

aga - 29-3-2014 at 14:00

Well, given the large quantity of copper (II) sulphate, i took up the suggestion to make Tetraamminecopper(II) sulfate.

It was a dismal failure.

Reading the bottles, my Ammonia is 3%, and full of soap.
My CuSO4(aq) is of an unidentified concentration (it hasn't crystallised yet)
The alcohol i used just said 'Alcohol' on it, so could be anything.

On squirting the 'Ammonia' into the CuSO4(aq), the solution formed a dark purple layer at the top, but this dissipated really fast, especially after stirring.

So, given that OTC Ammonia is weak, but still smells of ammonia, i think it should be feasible to heat it a bit, and bubble the gas thru some water. Repeat (maybe endlessly) to arrive at a much higher conc. ammonia.

Thanks to the useful link to solubility tables, i assume that the NH3 will dissolve happily in the receiving water, making a higher % solution (eventually).

Question: is there anything i can add to the OTC ammonia to evolve the actual NH3(g) faster, rather than heating ?

[Edited on 29-3-2014 by aga]

Texium - 29-3-2014 at 14:09

I purified some OTC ammonia using a distillation apparatus, and that worked very well. Mine came in a high enough concentration, I just needed to remove the surfactants, so boiling the ammonia and water together actually worked for me.

aga - 29-3-2014 at 14:44

A side note on Jars :

It seems to me that used food jars are the cheapest way to get glass jars.
The best (as in VFM) are pulses (lentils, beans etc) for Big jars, and paté for small jars.

Naturally you can eat the pulses, but i had one sniff at the paté and then the dogs cleaned the jars very thoroughly indeed.

The Lid Seal is a concern : i'm not sure what it is, and so have no idea if it is apt for storage of some things.

Other Side note on Hot Plates :

I ordered a cheap single-ring 230vac hot plate off ebay.
Certainly it will have a simple thermostat, which will be a bit pants in terms of temperature accuracy.
Seems that i have about 100 thyristors and opto-isolators from a previous project, so i think i'll do a circuit to control the heating more precisely.

If it works out OK, i'll happily share the design.

blogfast25 - 30-3-2014 at 05:09

Aga:

Household ammonia is typically only about 4 w% and doesn't work for the copper ammonia complex (although you could try with a really weak solution of CuSO4).

You can make a much stronger NH3 solution by reacting any ammonium salt (cheap garden grade (NH4)2SO4 for instance) with a strong alkali like NaOH:

(NH4)2SO4(s) + 2 NaOH(s) === > Na2SO4(s) + 2 NH3(g)

Capture the gas by leading it into clean water in which it is amazingly soluble. I did this some years ago and the gas didn't in fact bubble, instead at the outlet into the water one single bubble formed and the NH3 diffused directly from there into the water through the surface of the bubble. There's a thread on it somewhere here.

Maximum concentration that can be achieved is 33 w% (density of 0.9 g/ml).

For permanent storage of chemicals jars aren't really recommended, although it depends what it is you're storing.

Electrical hot plates are usually accurate enough for most purposes. Thyristors can be used to control tubular furnaces or mantle heaters, where better control can be an advantage.

[Edited on 30-3-2014 by blogfast25]

Fantasma4500 - 30-3-2014 at 10:19

this thing is insanely useful

http://www.trimen.pl/witek/calculators/stezenia.html

another useful tool: stay entirely objective

for boiling down liquids you can put a computer fan connected to old phone charger on top of the beaker, dragging the air out of the beaker
i yet have to try and add a fan to solution on a large glass pan, i recall i reduced several litres of water within a few hours on a glass pan, the kind you use for frying food in the oven

also.. aluminium foil is quite useful especially if working with HNO3, if you have a beaker thats entirely round without any 'tap' or similar you can make it perfectly airproof with abit of skill

aga - 30-3-2014 at 13:38

Quote: Originally posted by Antiswat

for boiling down liquids you can put a computer fan connected to old phone charger on top of the beaker, dragging the air out of the beaker

Superb ! What an excellent idea.

aga - 16-5-2015 at 11:29

Wow !

Just 1 year on and got half a clue what i'm doing and have chlorinated sulphur on a whim ...

Here's how the 'lab' has grown over the year :-

As more and more stuff arrived i had to get inventive with the severely limited space, so glassware decorates the hardboard side walls.

That hotplate has seen some action !

blogfast25 - 16-5-2015 at 12:35

Better than mine in some respects. Don't store flammable materials on top of your fume hood though!

Zombie - 16-5-2015 at 12:48

You're way ahead of me,
I have the room set but nothing else. 6-7 projects all at various stages of completion. Hell I don't even have the bench top in yet.

Texium - 16-5-2015 at 12:59

Nice, aga! It's great to see Shedworld Then and Now.

I remember reading this thread when you first posted it, when I had been around on here for just a couple months. I was thinking about how I should try building a fume hood like yours... still hasn't happened. At least I'm in the garage and out of the back yard for the most part now.
Just realizing how it's been about a year and a half since I started. Time flies. Seems like a pretty long time, but I still feel sort of like a noob.

Edit: I found some Then and Now pictures of my own to share.

First off, my cabinet in the garage where I keep all of my stuff, December 2013 after I got my first order of supplies.

...and here it is today (yes, it grew an extra shelf!) Also, all of the glassware had to be moved into another room because of space issues. Now it's primarily chemicals with some other miscellany.

And this is my lab bench that I've had since about 6 months ago. Prior to that, I did everything in the back yard. (pardon the mess, still haven't finished cleaning up from last weekend's endeavors)

[Edited on 5-16-2015 by zts16]

aga - 16-5-2015 at 13:09

> Don't store flammable materials on top of your fume hood though!

Ain't no place else for them to go.
Anyway, it's not ALL flammable up there, just mostly flammable ...

Super clean lab zts.

Needs more fizzing, popping, boiling-over and explosions.

I can lend you bucket loads of Stupidity if you need help decorating !

Texium - 16-5-2015 at 13:30

Quote: Originally posted by aga

>
Super clean lab zts.

Needs more fizzing, popping, boiling-over and explosions.

I can lend you bucket loads of Stupidity if you need help decorating !

Ha, did you post that before I edited my post adding the picture of my horridly messy lab bench?
I put that picture there specifically since you've criticized the immaculate looking pictures of my lab that I've posted in the past.

aga - 16-5-2015 at 13:46

What mess ?

You're a clean worker - it's something to be proud of.

Texium - 16-5-2015 at 13:53

Quote: Originally posted by aga

What mess ?

You're a clean worker - it's something to be proud of.

Ah, well thank you.
By my standards, the way my lab bench looks in the third picture I posted is quite messy and chaotic, but it does mean that I've been using it! I'm going to go spend an hour or so cleaning it... then I'll mess it up again.

blogfast25 - 16-5-2015 at 13:55

Quote: Originally posted by zts16

Ha, did you post that before I edited my post adding the picture of my horridly messy lab bench?

You don't know the meaning of the term 'horridly messy'! And you know what Berzelius has to say about labs and tidiness anyway...

aga - 16-5-2015 at 15:34

Quote: Originally posted by zts16

I'm going to go spend an hour or so cleaning it... then I'll mess it up again.

A clear case of Forward/Reverse OCD.

He's off to polish the plastic cups, carefully put them away in regimented neat order, pressure-wash the work surface (removing exactly 0.01mm of formica) then steam-clean it and dry it with lint-free cloth before polishing to a near-mirror finish.

Then, after carefully double-bagging the waste, the gloves, the cleaning materials *and* the clothes he wore (including the shoes), he goes for 3 showers of 90 seconds each at precisely 45 C, 50 C and 55 C, and puts on a fresh set of clothes.

On returning to the lab, there's nothing to clean ...

... so he'll get the plastic pots out again and toss them at random on the worktop whilst secretly hating/admiring the chaos.

After a full 6 minutes 12 seconds, as a final crazy act, he'll take precisely 2.48 g of yard dirt from the sealed plastic bag (kept specially for this purpose) and, with eyes tightly shut, toss it up in the air in the general direction of the workbench, writhing inside at the sheer horror of what it will do, yet struggling to suppress the the weird sexual pleasure the mess creation arouses

When he finally slows his breathing from a panic attack rate to a deep panting, he opens his eyes, and beholds the catastrophe before him, and gasps at the sheer Bachanalian randomness and filthiness of the scene.

Turning away in disgust, a tear of half self-hatred and half joy rolls down his cheek as he dons a fresh set of rubber gloves and reaches for the cleaning materials once again ...

[Edited on 16-5-2015 by aga]

Zombie - 16-5-2015 at 17:04

I too suffer from FYSUS (F yourself up syndrome). Mine is in my machine shop.

My work bench is my nemesis. I'll spend 1/2 an hour sorting parts, cleaning parts, putting everything where it belongs so I can easily find it again.
Then I'll spend 1/2 hr collecting tools from all over the shop.

The bitch is I will make the same mess on the next project, and be so disgusted that I have to rinse/ repeat that I'll walk away, and leave it until the next time I need the bench.

I'm praying I don't allow this pattern to begin in my lab. Spending 20 minutes looking for a particular chemical doesn't sound like it's good for the nerves.

Magpie - 16-5-2015 at 19:44

During high school summers I worked for my uncle on his wheat/pea farm. Of course he had a repair shop for farm implements, etc. He never (no never) put any of his tools away or cleaned the shop. But he knew where everything was at all times.

It's been great for me to have my own lab that I can organize and keep clean to my own satisfaction.

Brain&Force - 16-5-2015 at 21:13

Here's my lab:

How do you like it? I think it needs a bit of expansion

[Edited on 17.5.2015 by Brain&Force]

aga - 17-5-2015 at 00:28

Break away from focusing on clear liquids in clear bottles in a transparent glass lab.

Get some Colours in there.

j_sum1 - 17-5-2015 at 03:00

I dunno. I think the matching of refractive indices is masterful.
I am impressed.

Shedworld is Dead. Long live Shedworld !

aga - 23-4-2016 at 11:20

Just a little over two years and that original fume hood got dismantled today.

Basically it was too small.

Also, the shed got flooded with mud about 6 times over winter so needed a total re-vamp anway.

The new build will be more in line with how Air flows, and will allow much more headroom for those really tall glass setups.

Stuff to be added are Vac, Gas & Coolant spiggots, better lighting : stuff like that.

As there is solar power on hand, a mains fan and a 12v fan will be incorporated, just in case a power source fails.

Gotta get a LOT done tomorrow, as the entire contents of that tiny shed are strewn across the countryside at the mo.

Unfortunately the mice have been disturbed, but they didn't pay any rent anyway.

Edit:

WOW !

Reading back, it's amazing how much i have learnt in the past 2 years, mostly from SM members.

HUGE thanks to all contributors who helped that happen.

Photos of Shed VII to follow when the fume hood is built.

[Edited on 23-4-2016 by aga]

aga - 25-4-2016 at 11:44

2 Days in, 3 IKEA 'Albert' shelving units later ...

Oh, and the 'debris field' that remains from what was in the shed before, and waiting to be sorted into 'crap' and 'stuff that needs to go back in'.

Plenty of stuff got re-used, mostly the wood and shelves.

Had an idea for storing the Long glassware, but need to go to the plumbing shop to get materials ...

arkoma - 25-4-2016 at 11:47

I seem to remember one of your initial posts was boiling some random Spanish vegetation in a flask...

aga - 25-4-2016 at 11:59

Boiling random vegetables is crazy. Yes, i think i did.

Still amazed this thread was not dumped straight into Beginnings

ShedLab Build Update

aga - 30-4-2016 at 11:30

Shed v2 is coming along.

Still needs a side panel and roof panel to the 'hood, some lights, the extractor assembly (maybe a baffle) then on to sealing and painting, before figuring out a dual-sash counterweighted door arrangement.

This was a Brainwave whilst looking for things to use for hose barbs. The nozzle thing that comes with silicone sealant is Perfect for water and vacuum !

They come with a flange at the back and splines too, so hammer into slightly undersized holes in wood perfectly.

For the butane feed i really want proper Gas stuff.

The Control Panel allows easy control of all the 'services' in the 'hood to be messed with : adjustable vacuum, water, butane.

The extractor fan and lights will be on one common switch.

j_sum1 - 30-4-2016 at 14:41

Looking beyoootiful!

I really like the glassware storage on the right. That's handy.

Quote:

The extractor fan and lights will be on one common switch.

I wouldn't. There are times when you want one without the other. The hood at my work cannot do lights without fan and it is a PITA at times. The airflow from the fan is really strong and it makes it difficult to light a bunsen. If you turn the fan off then you are doing it in the dark.
Ok, that's a quirk of that particular setup. But consider the following:

You are doing something light sensitive and want to control the available light: blackout or UV or filtered light.
You want to take some photos and you stage everything in the fume hood because it is the only clear bench space and it has good light. But you don't need the fan.
You have a synth that is running for many hours. You want to expel gases produced but you don't need to leave the lights on all night.
Your are monitoring mass loss in a reaction by having it run on some digital scales with a camera pointed at it. You need good light but the air flow messes with the scale.

Maybe not everyday occurrences but for the sake of an extra switch you have some versatility.

And I use caulking nozzles for all kinds of things. They pass for funnel in some circumstances too.

The Volatile Chemist - 30-4-2016 at 14:58

You came a long way aga, looking good! And you were asking about the fluorescence of the concentrate product of boiling some vegetation in a flask if I remember correctly. Came a long way; now you've got a full-fledged lab instead of a beaker of grass

aga - 30-4-2016 at 23:35

Thanks for the tips : i'll see if i can find another switch that matches the others.

Previously all the glass was hanging on the walls. That worked, although long things like burettes were a bit precarious. Those tubes are just angled lengths of 80mm PVC drainpipe. Each one has bubble wrap stuffed down at the bottom to prevent the glass 'banging' or falling out.

14 long glass pieces (e.g. 300mm liebig etc) in 80mm is pretty efficient too !

Beaker of boiled grass ? I should try that again with an acetone soxhlet extraction under reduced pressure with iced water in the Allihn