Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Chemistry equipment

Chemistry equipment

tito-o-mac - 10-8-2007 at 05:24

Hello there all. I was just thinking of the basic equipment, apparatus and chemicals needed for a beginner to start up as most of us do not have easy access to labs. Any suggestions/comments etc? For example, the number , type of flasks neded, beakers, heating equipment, chemicals, safety gear etc.

12AX7 - 10-8-2007 at 14:06

Jars of canned food are a good source for soda-lime (DO NOT HEAT!) "beakers". Merely divert the flow to your glass recycling bin.

Number? More.

Some sort of heat is good...a microwave works in a pinch, and can be used (carefully) with soda-lime glass. You need pyrex or metal to use electric or fire though.

If you want to do anything somewhat more interesting, you'll want a distillation column. Essentially required for much organic prep.

Tim

Elttil - 20-8-2007 at 06:35

You should ware safety goggles when you work with fire and reactions. When you work with dusting salts you should ware a dust mask.

For chemicals I would recommend some acids (such as hydrochloric) and some sodium or potassium salts.

Slimz - 18-9-2007 at 08:07

i have started buying from here

www.agile-fx.com

They are cheap and the customer service is great...

[Edited on 18-9-2007 by Slimz]

Problem

Armistice19 - 18-9-2007 at 08:12

I have attempted to use Pyrex for heating solutions about 4 times now. The first time I did this I was boiling a solution of Sodium Hydroxide on a laboratory "Hot Plate" from my school. As the solution boiled, and crystals began to form at the bottom, once this happened I decided to add more sodium hydroxide solution on top of this anhydrate to get more overall yield. As I did this, and as soon as the room temperature water touched the hot Pyrex glass, it immediately shattered spraying sodium hydroxide everywhere, and destroying my hotplate with bright and loud flashes of electricity and the steaming of dead blown circuits. After this I decided to boil some water on my stove with Pyrex just to see what would happen. I filled the glass halfway full of tap water, and put the flame on as low as it would go, then I kept my distance and watched. KABLAM! The gas flames were put out by the splashing water and shards of glass flew all over my kitchen. This happened on 2 other occasions, and I just don't understand. I was told that Pyrex could withstand extreme temperature changes without shattering. I need this Pyrex because I can't have a metal container that will be easily oxidized by boiling bleach, Nitric, or Sulfuric Acids. Sure I could go out and buy a stainless steel pot, or use an old tuna can, but I'm not interested in that yet, first I want to know why people say this Pyrex won't shatter when in fact it does. Has this happened to anyone else? Perhaps the Pyrex can only withstand so much temperature change before shattering? Whatever it may be, even if it is my own fault, I would like to know what is going on here.

Slimz - 18-9-2007 at 08:23

FIRST of all NEVER let pyrex TOUCH the heat source like a hotplate... ALWAYS have airspace (or water).. touching a flame is OK (as long ast the mixture is not flamable

) i have sometimes used a frying pan with water in it (about an inch or so) as a buffer for my pyrex...

----- Pyrex -----
----- Air/water-----
------heat source-----

chromium - 18-9-2007 at 08:55

Do not expect that pyrex (or any other sort of glassware) will withstand everything. Always try to make temperature changes as smooth as possible.

Some years ago i routinely boiled liquids on propane flame. It did not break my pyrex but some of rather precious glassware was ringing with alarming sound if flames were big and uneven.

Now i use air bath. Its easy - just place empty stainless steel pot on hotplate and fix flask inside it but without any contact with hot surfaces. You can even do it without pot - just fix flask 1...2cm above hotplate. This way i can easily heat to about 200C. For higher temperatures i use gas flame and if possible prefer small flasks or test tubes.

Its desirable that flame never gets in contact with glass. You can easily make wide tube from sheet metal (or from tin can) to direct most of heat to your flask even if flame ends 10 or 20cm below the flask.

[Edited on 18-9-2007 by chromium]

12AX7 - 18-9-2007 at 09:38

I've found I can put pyrex (at least relatively thin RBFs) in contact with the fat end of a rich flame.

Edit: I might add that my all purpose propane torch, which serves me from boiling water to brazing steel to melting whole crucibles of bronze, gives a flame much more diffuse than, say, a bunsen burner, which is about half the diameter of this torch. I have complete control over the mixture, and it burns stable down to suprisingly low pressures (fractional PSI), allowing me to set up a slow, diffuse flame.

Tim

[Edited on 9-18-2007 by 12AX7]

Eclectic - 18-9-2007 at 10:19

Also "Pyrex" is a brand name which no longer has any relationship to Corning when it comes to houseware glass items. These may no longer actually be made of borosilicate glass. I've many "Pyrex" measuring cups and other household glass items break from thermal stress in the last 5 years. The thicker glass is also not as resistant to thermal stress breakage as thin laboratory glassware.

Slimz - 19-9-2007 at 10:42

I'm in communications with the guy from www.agile-fx.com trying to convince him to put together some kits.. they have very good prices.. a $100 set would pretty much include ALL the basics including separator, distiller etc...

Elttil - 21-9-2007 at 01:44

www.agile-fx.com seems to be a nice page with good prices. Personally I have ordered a scale from ebay

. I'll tell you later about quality..

Slimz - 24-9-2007 at 10:59

I know he also sells on ebay..
the prices are the same on his site tho.. some of the glassware is used but in fine condition.
i realy dont mind used glassware as long as the condition is good...

Slimz - 24-9-2007 at 11:01

WOW ! !
I just found out that DC Scientific glass is one of our clients... (we are tere IT staff)
Bet i could get some deals from them...

hdcwr0x2 - 30-9-2007 at 16:23

Wanted to say thanks for posting agile-fx, I live in Houston when not at college and even though they're not exactly in Houston, at least shipping should be quick.

When I start building my collection, should I get a straight through condenser or spend a little more and buy a Graham? I'm just going to be doing some simple organic fractional stuff and maybe some acid purifications etc, but I'm thinking Graham.

evil_lurker - 30-9-2007 at 21:11

I (meaning my business Volunteer Scientific, Inc.) have accounts with Wilmad, Ace Glass, and Chemglass.

If you got the $'s I can get you anything you want... just be advised that it will cost a little bit over published retail prices. This is because my business is not set up as a reseller with these vendors and as such can't get the items drop shipped. In addition, since I don't purchase thousands of dollars worth of glass at a time, I can't get a deep discount.

And to hdcwr0x2, don't get a graham on a simple distillation setup. They are primarly used in the vertical position, and when working horizontally the distillate will pool up in the coils. A 300mm liebig will easily take care of most things that one will encounter.

SecretSquirrel - 1-10-2007 at 01:38

I always had the impression that Graham condenser is used for cooling of the distillate only. Because as Evil_lurker said the condensed vapors get stuck in the coils and you'll have a hard time getting the stuff out.

Sauron - 1-10-2007 at 02:09

Grahan condensers are for vacuum distillations, they serve to increase the dwell time of the vapo in the coundenser, and it would be a mistake to try to use one for reflux.

Whereas if you use a Liebig for vacuum distillation you may find that some vapor makes it through, hopefully to get condensed in your cold trap.

The use of some more efficient condenser designs will resolve the problem. A good long West for example is much better than a Liebig. Allihn and Friedrichs and double-surface condensers with cold coil (rather the reverse of a Graham) are mainly for reflux but in some instances can be used conventionally. Allihm condensers need to be vertical whether reflux or delivery as otherwise some condensate will be held up from fraction to fraction.

As for Graham, there's a pressure drop across a Graham. See for yourself.

chemkid - 1-10-2007 at 12:01

i buy from http://www.hometrainingtools.com/

chemkid

[Edited on 1-10-2007 by chemkid]

djcubis2003 - 1-10-2007 at 19:46

When using a heating mantle is it nessesary to leave an air bath or just let it sit in the mantle to avoid breakage.

Slimz - 2-10-2007 at 04:28

Quote:

Originally posted by hdcwr0x2
Wanted to say thanks for posting agile-fx, I live in Houston when not at college and even though they're not exactly in Houston, at least shipping should be quick.

When I start building my collection, should I get a straight through condenser or spend a little more and buy a Graham? I'm just going to be doing some simple organic fractional stuff and maybe some acid purifications etc, but I'm thinking Graham.

Excelent... If there is one thing I AM good at its finding deals online... It's kinda funny, them being in texas and all...

Fitz - 14-10-2007 at 09:05

Another good site is http://www.sciplus.com They have some nice Pyrex knockoffs.

Antwain - 14-10-2007 at 09:43

I have a type of condenser which I can't identify. It seems to share properties of both Graham and Dimroth condensers. It was a water jacket and a spiral. These are joined at the bottom, so that the inlet and outlet are at the top. I am guessing that water is meant to go down the jacket then up the spiral, since that way it would still be cold, unlike the reverse, where the jacket would provide little assistance. Can anyone clear this up and tell me the primary use of this condenser?

Since I also have a couple of air and libeig condensers as well as a graham, I haven't used it, but it would be good to know what it is for.

not_important - 14-10-2007 at 13:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Antwain
I have a type of condenser which I can't identify. It seems to share properties of both Graham and Dimroth condensers. It was a water jacket and a spiral. These are joined at the bottom, so that the inlet and outlet are at the top. I am guessing that water is meant to go down the jacket then up the spiral, since that way it would still be cold, unlike the reverse, where the jacket would provide little assistance. Can anyone clear this up and tell me the primary use of this condenser?

Look like any of these?
http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/Area_of_Interest/Equipment_Suppl...

Antwain - 14-10-2007 at 14:22

It is closest to the one called "Aldrich jacketed Friedrichs coil condensers", however The jacket is straight like on a liebig condenser. Funny how they show the coil as the "in" and the jacket as the "out". Doesn't seem right to me.

Armistice19 - 19-10-2007 at 14:08

When it comes to buying lab equipment, what other options do we have? I was wondering if maybe anyone had any cool ideas on how to improvise these various chemistry equipments. Now I don't usually view myself as a chemist in search of the "poor man's" method to an easy way in, but I always ask myself, why pay for something when you don't have to? When it all boils down to it, my excuse for being the way I am is just the fact that I would rather be a MacGyver than an Einstein I guess. I mean yes I have the money for material conveniences, but it has always been so much more fascinating a concept for me to be able to walk into an office building, observe my surroundings, and list in my mind the endless possibilities that modern society provides for me in the realm of explosives, and with nothing but the clothes on my back I would say to myself "I can make dynamite right now." Even the simple over the counter items at your local K-mart are of more interest to me than reading a magazine full of products by Fisher Scientific, and they cost significantly less too. Just looking at what is allowed by law to be sold in our stores, and then comparing it with each products potential risk for danger when it is used in the right context by an informed individual. I mean just look at Health Salt for example, or Aluminum foil, or even Christmas lights. These stupid everyday household items and uselessly abundant corporate products become exactly what they are not, useful, and it is because of this that we can be so sure that we are informed of what so many others are not. We can finally realize that all the things that we can’t obtain, and all the things that we can never find, are obtainable, right under our noses. The only thing that’s stopping us from reaching out and taking them is our lack of knowledge. In today’s world we have become so dependent on pointless technological advancements and American appliances for the lazy lifestyle. If we were to loose our methane we would assume that we couldn't cook food until we got it back, or even keep warm without a working furnace. If we don't have electric light bulbs we think we can't see, if we don't have digital alarm clocks we think we can't tell what time it is, and if we don't have coffee machines.... we think we can't drink coffee. Maybe one day you stopped to think about poverty, and realized that if someone can’t pay their electricity bill, the only thing that’s stopping them from gaining back their access to fresh food, communication, and lighting is the fact that they don't know enough about electricity and wiring to reconnect it themselves? Even if it was the middle of the night and they had absolutely no way of obtaining a flame, flashlight, or batteries, they could just mix Chili powder and bleach, with any common alkali, and a couple drops of antiseptic from a medicine cabinet when added to the mixture would create chemiluminescence that would last 5 times longer than any flame or candle, and at no expense to you. How about the fact that we rely on automobiles for transportation, and if our car battery runs out we think we have to buy a new one for $60 when we could just use garden sulfur, water, and a brazing kit from home depot to make enough battery acid to refill it ten more times? Why should we allow ourselves to be bound by these tethers and weights when we can just cut right through them? What are we, as an informed and creative community, really capable of in the field of chemistry? What can we really do with what we already have? What can you create with the contents of your home?

Xenoid - 19-10-2007 at 14:19

How about.... breaking your rant into paragraphs so it is more readable!

"they could just mix Chili powder and bleach, with any common alkali, and a couple drops of antiseptic from a medicine cabinet when added to the mixture would create chemiluminescence that would last 5 times longer than any flame or candle"

Well I've tried this and it didn't work, please supply us with the precise details......

"if our car battery runs out we think we have to buy a new one for $60 when we could just use garden sulfur, water, and a brazing kit from home depot to make enough battery acid to refill it ten more times"

Hmmm.. most car batteries fail from shorted plates due to sulphation, adding sulphuric acid won't do any good, especially if it's made from that concoction!

Regards, Xenoid

[Edited on 19-10-2007 by Xenoid]

Armistice19 - 24-10-2007 at 10:26

Here is the link to the chemiluminescent formula stated earlier.

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/12/09/firefly-chemistry/

I have already done this and it works very well.

Also, I apologize for not mentioning Sulfanation earlier. I assumed that we were all familiar with this process. I, instead, was referring to a new and more practical method of improvised sulfuric acid production. Besides, Sulfanation isn't anything that a little sand paper can't handle. Even if the Sulfanation process was fully completed, and the anodes and cathodes had completely transformed into lead sulfate, all one would need is a new lead electrode, and a new lead oxide cathode. This is not a problem, simply pry loose some wheel weights from your neighbor’s hubcaps, melt them down, and then pour them into a mold to create an electrode of lead. Then for the lead dioxide cathode, all you have to do is add some Stump remover to your battery acid to create nitric acid (Of course you would need an ice bath because the reaction is extremely exothermic) then add sufficiently milled lead to a dilute nitric acid in order to create lead nitrate. Thermal decomposition of this will create lead oxide which can be used as the cathode. The truth is batteries ALWAYS run out because of Sulfanation. We all know that Sulfanation creates lead sulfate, and dilute sulfuric acid. I was much more referring to the problem related to the dilute sulfuric acid than the problem related to the lead sulfate. The lead sulfate problem is so elementary and easy to fix that I thought the battery acid replacement problem would be much more revolutionary to address rather than the lead sulfate which is so over discussed and repetitive.
I am also very sorry that you didn't recognize this earlier, but there were no paragraph indents or breaks because the former conglomeration of words was in fact all but one paragraph. I'm sorry if the thesis statement didn't match the conclusion to your particular liking, but I very much discourage the use of repetition in theoretical writing. I would much rather state a thesis in completely different words than to just repeat it as the conclusion. As you can see, the thesis statement in the form of a rhetorical question “When it comes to buying lab equipment, what other options do we have?” actually matches the conclusion statement “What can you create with the contents of your home?” because both are completely related to the art of improvisation when applied to chemistry. Thus the thesis and conclusion point towards the same general theme, making this one single paragraph. If you truly believe that the former paragraph was a long or drawn out one, I would be quite disappointed with your judgment, and I would have to question your sources, and even the books that you have read in the past which you have used as a comparison with my writings. With the exception that there is no indent at the beginning of my paragraph (a mistake which is constantly made by the forum posting program) the article above is in complete and fully accurate MLA format. If there are any more questions or complaints I would be happy to answer or satisfy them. My email is mcguffineffect@hotmail.com

Xenoid - 24-10-2007 at 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Armistice19
Here is the link to the chemiluminescent formula stated earlier.

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/12/09/firefly-chemistry/

I have already done this and it works very well.

Yes, yes, I am already familiar with that reference, it was quoted it in the "Glowing Tomato" thread a few months ago.

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=8971&a...

As I said, if you think the chilli powder method works well, please describe your precise method, because as I stated I could not get it to work. I also have serious doubts that you were able to get luminescence which will "......last 5 times longer than any flame or candle, and at no expense to you...." whatever that means!

Well done on the paragraph front, two is better than one, I guess!

Regards, Xenoid

Centimeter - 28-10-2007 at 00:18

Armistice,

First of all, a true scientist should always use APA rather than MLA.

Second of all, your paragraph argument, although hilarious, is quite flawed. By your statement, every essay ever written would be a single paragraph.

Third, I think I would rather buy a battery than spend days reconstructing one.

Now back to the focus of this thread...

I can't stress enough how important it is to get a quality hotplate with a magnetic stirrer. This is quite possibly the most important item one can have and worth shelling out a decent amount of money. I would recommend getting a corning model with a nice sized ceramic surface. Don't be cheap and try and get away with some cooking hotplate. You'll never get even heating.

You’ll also need the synthetic chemist’s bible, also known as Vogel’s Textbook of Practical Organic Chemistry.

I am quite surprised that you guys are having so much glass breakage. I've put beakers over gasoline camping stoves and they've lasted me for years. If you can't put it in direct contact with a hot plate, something is wrong. That's common procedure in both school and professional labs. Make sure to check your glassware for bubbles or small cracks. If problems persist, I was thinking that a cheap solution might be to sprinkle some salt on your hotplate to provide a small buffer region.

Armistice19 - 29-10-2007 at 11:02

Lol...haha...Ok, no seriously, you're totally right centimeter. I can't argue with you there. I guess I'm just the kind of guy that enjoys that kind of intense mechanical labor… anyway, everything you have said is extremely helpful, but remember I’m not using chemistry beakers, I’m using flame resistant Pyrex which I found in my kitchen. It has been said that these were once a form borosilicate glass, but apparently they no longer are, thus apparently causing the problem. I knew that there was no reason why these glass beakers should be breaking as often as they were. I am as boggled as you are. I knew this because in my chemistry class we had always put the beaker in direct contact with hotplates and flame as well, but as a solution, I very much appreciate your salt buffer idea. It seems very practical. Thank you, and I will try to do my rants in APA format from now on.

Armistice19 - 29-10-2007 at 11:07

Xenoid, was the Alkali you used Sodium Hydroxide? If so, did you boil it down to dry crystals? Also, this artical was written way back when. I believe H2O2 was much more concentrated back then, try gently steaming off some 3% solution to slightly concentrate it.

Xenoid - 29-10-2007 at 13:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Armistice19
Xenoid, was the Alkali you used Sodium Hydroxide? If so, did you boil it down to dry crystals? Also, this artical was written way back when. I believe H2O2 was much more concentrated back then, try gently steaming off some 3% solution to slightly concentrate it.

Look, have YOU actually tried this!

I have tried various approaches, using combinations of the following materials;
Chilli powder and paprika extracted with both alcohol and acetone. Sodium hydroxide in the form of fine granules / powder. Sodium hypochlorite at 4.2% (bleach) and 13.5% (swimming pool additive). Hydrogen peroxide 3% (OTC) and 30% (swimming pool shock treatment). All that happens is the NaOH sits at the bottom of the test tube and there is amuch effervescing when the H2O2 is added and the solution becomes warm. As for light output, it is zero, nought, nada!

I'm not saying this doesn't work (although the article was a little sensationalist) just that I can't reproduce it. If you can please give me precise details I will try it.

As for your statement about this (or any other chemiluminescent process) being a "free" or even cheap practical light source, that is just plain ridiculous. "Light sticks" are OK for emergency lighting (I carry one or two when caving). In terms of "cents per lumen or candela" (whatever the measurement is) chemiluminescence would have to be about the most expensive source of light available!

Regards, Xenoid

Never felt like putting a subject, so I don't know why I should start

Armistice19 - 29-10-2007 at 16:07

I actually do want to talk to you about this and offer my aid if you would like, but we are very off subject here, mostly due to me. You should email me at the address I posted earlier. I actually did do this experiment, and I was successful, it took me 2 or three tries but I did it. Also, I completely understand what you are saying about this being expensive, I didn't really explain that very well. What I meant was that if you were in a facility with all of those items already available to you (i.e.): a first aid kit, a kitchen, a janitor’s closet, then the items would be free because technically you would be stealing them. Though I have to admit, you are completely right, it would be highly unlikely to find the pure grade ROEBIC Sodium Hydroxide drain cleaner in a janitor’s closet, but it is also interesting to speculate. My rant was a....well...ok really, really excessive I admit that, but it was purely theoretical, thus making it severely impractical. I was simply trying to initiate and evoke a deeper thought, and questioning, or an "out of the box" type of thinking. I apologize, I suppose that sometimes my skepticism leads to an accommodation of somewhat lofty thoughts, but then again it never fails to arouse a strong response.

Xenoid - 29-10-2007 at 16:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Armistice19
I actually did do this experiment, and I was successful, it took me 2 or three tries but I did it.

Please reply to my post, fourth from the end of the "Glowing Tomato" thread, that would be an appropriate place!

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=8971&a...

Regards, Xenoid

Armistice19 - 29-10-2007 at 16:51

Regarded, Armistice

Armistice19 - 8-11-2007 at 17:55

Actually, I have just realized my own irresponsibility towards this agreement. In order to realistically do what you have requested, I’m going to need a new source of borosilicate. I since have shattered all my glassware due to the previously mentioned fact that Pyrex is no longer a valid source. I also began to vent my negative emotions about this incident by ranting about my being an improvised chemist who chooses to challenge himself by only using OTC materials, which furthermore can only be obtained by using cash money. What I failed to mention, is that most of my anger and negative emotions towards this matter occur specifically when other people around me begin to obtain much coveted things such as laboratory grade chemistry equipment that is purchased via Internet/ chemical supply store. Most of this anger stems from an even more deeply rooted jealousy which stems even furthermore from the constant ominous reminder that I can not do the same. This is due to an unfortunate incident that occurred about a year ago with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Now that I've let the cat out of the bag, does anyone have any..ummm... suggestions?

MagicJigPipe - 24-11-2007 at 22:37

I will admit I did not read every word of this post so if someone already said this then I am reiterating.

If you buy "PYREX" glass at Wal-Mart or any store like that, it will break easily from heat stress. It is not real Pyrex. This includes, but is not limited to, measuring cups and baking pans.

I once attempted to concentrate sulfuric acid by boiling it in a "PYREX" measuring cup and it shattered after it started to cool. Needless to say it was quite a disaster (300mL of ~300*C 98% sulfuric acid all over my workbench/garage). I have done the same thing in the same, real Pyrex beaker like 50 times and it is still going strong. I have even heated it directly on a electric stove top (the coil kind) and it was all good. Never used a flame but I'm sure it would be OK as well.

It pisses me off that they can put the Pyrex name on non borosillicate glass. So stupid. However, it should give you a hint when it says not to use it on the stove.

Armistice19 - 26-11-2007 at 13:18

Yes... MagicJigPipe...umm… This is true, and this annoying little inconvenience is what lead centimeter to post on of his solutions to the problem. In the above, centimeter stated that something as miniscule as a thin layer of regular table salt can make useless Pyrex, actually quite useful. At first I was skeptical, but I recently tried this salt buffer technique with a non-borosilicate Pyrex measuring cup, a frying pan, and water. My skepticism and fear of the past when dealing with spontaneously shattering glass and air-born acids lead me to start the experiment with a full blown 3 inch layer of table salt. Obviously the water did not boil. Then, I continued removing salt from the pan until the layer was thinned down to about 1/16th of an inch. After this the water boiled magnificently, and the glass did not shatter at all. In fact, I was able to turn my stove flame up to its highest power, and still there was no breakage. By adding this buffer of table salt we can broaden the category of materials that we can use for practical chemistry. I find also centimeter’s suggestion to the synthetic chemist’s bible, also known as Vogel’s Textbook of Practical Organic Chemistry, extremely helpful. This book (though I have only read the first chapter) is by far one of the most helpful applicable aids in chemistry I have come across (that and cavemanchemistry.com). I have now successfully boiled many chemicals with nothing but household makeshift chemistry equipment, and it feels great, never been better, thanks centimeter.

-Armistice 19*

*See the armistice of 1918--> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armistice_with_Germany_%28Compi...

Eclectic - 26-11-2007 at 13:59

The nice thing about being on an FBI watch list, is you KNOW you might be watched. Buy whatever you like, don't do anything illegal, and let them waste their time watching.

MagicJigPipe - 26-11-2007 at 19:05

Have you tried H2SO4? Something tells me non borosillicate glass would not last boiling sulfuric acid.

And iit's doubtful that water would break it even without the salt. It won't go over 100C! Unless of course you immediately threw the hot glass in some cold water.

Besides, you can get boroglass beakers for just slightly more than mason jars so why not? Then you don't have to worry about breakage (not as much anyway).

[Edited on 27-11-2007 by MagicJigPipe]

Good old lime glass

Armistice19 - 14-4-2008 at 09:01

Actually, I just used an old beer bottle out of the recycling. The salt buffer is extensivley useful, it is making things much easier around here. I can use just about any glass container and still reach boiling without cracking the glass, though I have not tried sulfuric acid yet.

Saerynide - 14-4-2008 at 11:19

Canning jars (the ones with the screw on metal bands and separate lids) are incredibly heat resistant. I had some in a pot with the water on a high turbulent boil for 1.5 hours, and they were fine. Of course, I did not remove them from the water until they had cooled.

Just make sure they are not touching the bottom of the pot directly when boiling (I threw in a bunch of forks and knives to line the bottom of the pot)