I came across it in my 1920's chem book. All it said was methylamine produced by heating glycein at 450 deg C. Is this something that should be done
under nitrogen?Naxs - 7-12-2008 at 19:54
First, I recommend rechecking for spelling errors, especially in the names of substances.
Second, I have not heard of this method, but whatever you do, you'll at least have to add something else. Just heating glycerine isn't going to yield
any methylamine, no matter the temperature.
Are you sure there was nothing else mentioned in that book? Or is 'glycein' meant to refer to something else?brew - 7-12-2008 at 21:00
Id say it was meant to be the amino acid, "glycine".
The only danger that I could see, is the perhaps rearangement forming HCN and CO2 and 2H2. But this is a total guess.
[Edited on 7-12-2008 by brew]smuv - 7-12-2008 at 21:01
Quote:
Originally posted by Naxs
Just heating glycerine isn't going to yield any methylamine, no matter the temperature.
Are you sure there was nothing else mentioned in that book? Or is 'glycein' meant to refer to something else?
Sure it does...its a decarboxylation
A quick scifinder search yielded nothing with good yields and low complexity. It is probably best to stick to the more classic methods...Sauron - 7-12-2008 at 21:52
I second the proposition that what is being described is the decarboxylation of glycine, aminoacetic acid.
Just bear in mind that methylamine is a gas.
Perhaps glycine hydrochloride will decarboxylate to methylamine hydrochloride.
But glycine like all AAs is zwitterionic.
I would be prepared to condense methylamine vapor in any case.
I doubt that this method will be very efficient at doing anything but wasting glycine.
