Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Diethylether (sulfuric acid saving method)

Diachrynic - 14-5-2024 at 12:05

The preparation of ether is very old. To give some perspective, in europe, diethylether is older than the potato.[5] It this therefore surprising that most documented preparations of ether on YouTube use much more sulfuric acid than actually needed. I was made aware of this process via a good friend and subsequently found a paper that detailed the limits of this procedure.

From the videos I have seen on YouTube, ether yields from 1-2.5x the volume of sulfuric acid have been reported.[1] There is a great post by len1 on this board which mentions most of the important insights from the paper which I will follow here, although without giving any literature and his yield is in the same ballpark as the YouTube ones mentioned before (although he does mention the sulfuric acid in the flask can probably be reused for about 3-4x the volume of ether).[2]

The limits of just how much ether a given amount of sulfuric acid can make was explored by Evans and Sutton in their remarkable 1913 paper.[3] According to them, a given volume of sulfuric acid can make up to 40x its volume of ether.

Synthesis:
Two trials were conducted. A 500 mL three-necked flask containing 40 mL 95% denaturated EtOH + 40 mL 95-98% H2SO4 (Note 1), a stir bar and two ceramic boiling stones (from a broken Büchner funnel) was used for the first trial and it was reused as is for the second trial. It was fitted with a 500 mL addition funnel (Note 2), an internal thermometer, and a simple distillation setup with vapor thermometer and a jacketed coil condenser with 2-7 °C cooling water, as well as a 1 L receiving flask in an ice bath. The synthesis was run in 8-12 h periods with about equally long interruptions for the nights. The oilbath temperature was maintained by a thermometer inside the oil that gave feedback to the hotplate. The temperature in the cooling water was maintained initially with ice, later with a recirculating water chiller.

ether_synthesis.png - 1.9MB
Fig. 1: Sketch of the apparatus.

First trial: The oilbath was maintained at 150-154 °C. When the internal temperature reached 140 °C, the addition of ethanol was started, at first very slowly. In total 734 g 95% denaturated EtOH was added during 26 hours, at a rate that kept the internal temperature at around 140-145 °C (Note 3). Still head temperature rose from 67-84 °C during the reaction (Note 4). The distillate weighed 734 g, was fractionally redistilled (Note 5) and the fraction boiling at 34-40 °C was collected.
Yield: 289 g of ether. (52% of the theory)

The flasks contents were black and contained a substantial amount of tar, but it didn't seem to affect anything, so it was used as is for the second preparation.

Ether_tar_residue.jpg - 1.5MB
Fig. 2: The residue in the distilling flask.

Second trial: The oilbath was maintained at 170-174 °C to allow for faster ethanol addition. When the internal temperature reached 140 °C, the addition of ethanol was started. 1500 g 95% denaturated EtOH was added during 17.5 h, at a rate that kept the internal temperature at around 140-145 °C. Still head temperature rose from 85-92 °C during the reaction. The distillate weighed 1515 g (Note 6), was fractionally redistilled and the fraction boiling at 34-40 °C was collected.
Yield: 545 g of ether. (48% of the theory)

The combined distillation residue of both reactions weighed 1301 g and was then further fractionally distilled (setup as before) to recover the unconsumed ethanol. There was obtained 1015 g of ethanol boiling in the range 78-82 °C and a residue of 282 g, which was dirty water containing some insoluble oil, it had a nauseating smell and was highly acidic. Several spoons of KOH were required to neutralize it. This residue was discarded.

Overall: 40 mL (ca. 72 g) 95-98% H2SO4 and 2234 g 95% denaturated EtOH were employed, of which 1219 g were consumed, yielding 834 g (ca. 1.1 L) of ether, or a 90% yield based on consumed ethanol (that is assuming the recovered ethanol was also 95%).

Notes:
1. The denaturant in the alcohol is likely 1% methyl ethyl ketone, 1% isopropanol and denatonium benzoate. The sulfuric acid was food grade.
2. Evans recommend an addition funnel with a long stem that reaches above the liquid surface, but does not deliver the ethanol onto the internal thermometer. In the experiment, an addition funnel was used that delivered the falling drops of ethanol just on the edge of the liquid in the flask opposite the thermometer.
3. It is often said to match the addition rate to the distillation rate, but in my experience, if the ethanol is added such that the internal temperature stays around 140-145 °C, the distillation rate more or less automatically adjusts to match the addition rate.
4. The temperature in the still head can be pretty much ignored, as it doesn't seem to correlate to the ether content at all.
5. The fractional distillation used a 60 cm vacuum insulated vigreux column, a relux divider still head, a jacketed coil condenser with 2-7 °C cooling water and a receiving flask in an ice bath. The distillation was done slowly over the course of 2-4 hours.
6. The amount of ether present was estimated as follows: About 3 g of CaCl2 and about 10 g of water were mixed (exothermic) and chilled in a fridge to 5-10 °C. A sample of the distillate was placed in a 10 mL measuring cylinder, some of the calcium chloride solution was added and the whole mixture carefully mixed. In this case 1.8 mL of distillate and 2 mL of the calcium chloride solution gave after shaking 0.8 mL of upper organic layer, indicating an ether content around 40-45 vol%.

Discussion:
The combination of stirring and ceramic boiling stones prevented bumping effectively, it was never an issue during the entire experiment.

It can also be seen that the dilution of water is not limiting the reaction, as it distills off alongside the ether and alcohol in more or less a stable equilibrium, if it is allowed to do so.

The effiency does not seem to substiantially drop over the course of the synthesis, going slower than in the second trial brings no real benefit, and the amount of ether produced was about 29x the volume of sulfuric acid. (It seems very likely that it can still keep making even more ether - the limit is not yet reached. It would be indicated by the flask running empty and being practially impossible to maintain at 140 °C, according to Evans and Sutton. Testing the distillate as discussed in Note 5 should also indicate completion.)

There is another thing worth mentioning. Where does the sulfuric acid actually go? According to the 1913 paper,[3] only 15-20% could be accounted as SO2, formed due to oxidation by the sulfuric acid. However, in their 1917 followup,[4] their new analysis shows the following: In the distillate and gaseous exhaust, about 2% of the sulfur in the acid leaves as sulfur dioxide and about 89% remains in the sulfate oxidation state, of which 47% was present as sulfuric acid, 8% as ethyl sulfuric acid, 34% as diethyl sulfate and about 5% as unspecified sulfonic acids and sulphonates. The remaining sulfur is found in the charred distillation residue in the flask.

Whether or not the sulfuric acid and diethyl sulfate actually slowly distill or are merely aerosolized and carried over as droplets from the bursting bubbles during the boiling in the distillation flask is unclear.

But given the toxic nature of diethyl sulfate, it is save to say that the crude distillate should be treated as dangerous not just for flammability reasons. These impurities will likely also be present in the "usual", less sulfuric acid efficient preparations!

Finally, I plan on purifying the ether further by drying over KOH and redistilling, but I anticipate the the majority of the loss will come from handling. I intentionally distilled very slowly, the column is very easy to overheat and flood, so the ether should already be more than adequate for extractions and such.

Literature:
[1] - (a) NileRed, YouTube 2014, "Making Diethyl Ether", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z2oE8-uthU, (b) myst23YT, YouTube 2010, "Make Diethyl ether", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytdO3YzXNkQ, (c) Amateur Chemistry, YouTube 2023, "Turning Vodka into Diethyl Ether", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mot8RrJbRko, (d) Chemiolis, YouTube 2022, "Making Diethyl Ether", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbCbq2OIyPA, (d) Thy Labs, YouTube 2021, "Making Diethyl Ether", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qysm48HiKQo
[2] - len1, SciMad 2008, "Diethyl Ether - Illustrated Practical Guide", https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=9747
[3] - P. N. Evans, L. M. Sutton, "The efficiency of the preparation of ether from alcohol and sulfuric acid", J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1913, 35, 6, 794-800, https://doi.org/10.1021/ja02195a018
[4] - P. N. Evans, G. K. Foresman, "Sulphur By-Products of the Preparation of Ether", Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci. 1917, 27, 211-216, https://journals.indianapolis.iu.edu/index.php/ias/article/view/13303
[5] - Wikipedia, "History of the potato", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_potato

Sulaiman - 14-5-2024 at 21:33

Nice experiment and writeup, and a cute diagram (how?)

Keras - 14-5-2024 at 21:48

A good question would be: is it possible to replace sulphuric acid by some other acid? At least partially. Like, say, even sodium bisulphate or sulphamic acid, or a mix thereof.

Diachrynic - 15-5-2024 at 00:10

Sulaiman, thank you. The drawing was done on paper first with pencil, then with black ink, and finally scanned.

Keras, it's an interesting idea. If I remember correctly, heating ethanol and sulfamic acid does produce ethyl sulfamate, CH3-CH2-OSO2-NH2, which would be analogous to the ethyl sulfuric acid that is the intermediate in the classical synthesis. I couldn't find anything whether ethyl sulfamate can form diethyl ether though. Maybe it is worth some testing.
In the 1913 paper cited, they also do a trial where they intentionally dilute the sulfuric acid first to about 30% and proceed as usual. When the mixture concentrates enough to maintain 140 °C, the reaction proceeds as with concentrated acid. Obviously it would be more practical to concentrate dilute acid by boiling most of the water off in a beaker or something before using it in this reaction, but it shows that >95% concentrated sulfuric acid is not a requirement at all.

Keras - 15-5-2024 at 04:03

Quote: Originally posted by Diachrynic  
Keras, it's an interesting idea. If I remember correctly, heating ethanol and sulfamic acid does produce ethyl sulfamate, CH3-CH2-OSO2-NH2, which would be analogous to the ethyl sulfuric acid that is the intermediate in the classical synthesis.[…]


TBH, the idea here is to completely replace sulphuric acid by something else, although 15% sulphuric acid is still available in Europe. Since (at least theoretically) the acid is here only as a catalyst, it should be possible to substitute sulphuric acid for any (strong?) acid. Hydrohalid acids will evaporate, but crystalline acids like sulphamic or even citric acid should not. Bisulphate is quite acidic by itself, since apparently you can make hydrogen chloride by mixing bisulphate with salt.

chornedsnorkack - 15-5-2024 at 08:00

One candidate that has been mentioned as an option for "strong mineral acid" is phosphoric acid. How does it compare?
(In case of sulphuric acid, reduction to SO2 is one of the side reactions. Phosphoric acid is resistant to that one.)

Sir_Gawain - 15-5-2024 at 11:59

One substitute I read about somewhere (I can’t remember where) that you could also use is anhydrous zinc chloride.

clearly_not_atara - 15-5-2024 at 12:06

Phosphoric acid is weak (pKa 2.3) but polyphosphoric acid is stronger (H4P2O7 pKa1 ≈ 0.5, H3P3O9 pKa1 ≈ -12) but it tends to attack pretty much every available material except fused quartz (and possibly even that).

A combination of phosphoric acid with something like methanesulfonic acid might do it.

bnull - 15-5-2024 at 13:26

The following paper has a nice set of experimental data beginning on page 4. Various salts and acids were tested. It seems that van Alphen was not in his best mood back then.

Attachment: J. van Alphen - The formation of ether from alcohol.pdf (428kB)
This file has been downloaded 232 times

BromicAcid - 15-5-2024 at 14:35

Quote:
When reading the original publications of Williamson, one is
immediately impressed by the fact that the only thing he tries to
prove and actually succeeds in proving, is that one molecule of
ether is formed from two molecules of alcohol


Thanks for this gem bnull, some very cool bits of information in here for people looking to tinker.

Keras - 16-5-2024 at 03:18

Thanks for the article. It is quite encouraging. Since acidic salts seem to work, probably sodium bisulphate can be used. I’ll test that next week.

I've tried 75% phosphoric acid. It doesn’t work, at least if assembled the classical way. At 80 °C circa, the ethanol distills out and that’s it. It might be necessary to use a reflux with ice cold water to trap ether and ethanol vapours.

clearly_not_atara - 16-5-2024 at 09:49

Quote:
The best catalyst was ferric sulfate

A line from the paper I won't soon forget

Keras - 17-5-2024 at 00:00

OK, so far I've tried, in a simple micro 10 mL erlenmeyer connected to a vertical tube (acts an air-cooled condenser), solid sodium bisulphate + ethanol; solid sodium bisulphate + 23% HCl + ethanol; dissolved sodium bisulphate in 37% sulphuric acid.

None of those gave off any ether smell. As far as I’m aware, the ethanol simply boils off at 80 °C circa and then, that’s it. The high boiling point of concentrated sulphuric acid keeps the ethanol bounded despite the temperature. In the paper cited above the experiments must've been conducted inside an autoclave or some high-pressure-bearing system, but definitely not what we usually do, i.e. a distillation apparatus where ethanol is fed in a continuous run.

unionised - 17-5-2024 at 03:02

I'm fairly sure that adding a concentrated aqueous solution of sodium bisulphate to ethanol gives a precipitate of sodium sulphate and a solution of sulphuric acid. (anyone got the Merck index handy? That's where I think I read it but mine's not to hand)
I doubt the reaction goes to completion; but it might go far enough to produce something from which you can distill ether

Keras - 17-5-2024 at 03:50

Quote: Originally posted by unionised  
I'm fairly sure that adding a concentrated aqueous solution of sodium bisulphate to ethanol gives a precipitate of sodium sulphate and a solution of sulphuric acid. (anyone got the Merck index handy? That's where I think I read it but mine's not to hand)
I doubt the reaction goes to completion; but it might go far enough to produce something from which you can distill ether


I’ll try again with a concentrated solution of sodium bisulphate and see what's going on. I’ll keep you in touch.

Precipitates - 17-5-2024 at 05:02

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
In the paper cited above the experiments must've been conducted inside an autoclave or some high-pressure-bearing system, but definitely not what we usually do, i.e. a distillation apparatus where ethanol is fed in a continuous run.


From the above reference:

J. van Alphen - The formation of ether from alcohol.

"If not stated otherwise the reaction mixture was heated for eight hours in a closed tube in a Carius oven at a temperature of 155-160°C".

Yeah, I guess it has to be a tightly-closed system, with the exception being sulphuric acid. At these temperatures and pressures, I guess it is a little less surprising that such an array of salts can give ether. But still a potentially good way of making small amounts of diethyl ether if you don't have access to sulphuric acid.

bnull - 17-5-2024 at 05:11

Quote: Originally posted by unionised  
I'm fairly sure that adding a concentrated aqueous solution of sodium bisulphate to ethanol gives a precipitate of sodium sulphate and a solution of sulphuric acid. (anyone got the Merck index handy? That's where I think I read it but mine's not to hand)

"[D]ec by alcohol into sodium sulfate and free H2SO4." (Merck Index, 1972)

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
In the paper cited above the experiments must've been conducted inside an autoclave or some high-pressure-bearing system, but definitely not what we usually do, i.e. a distillation apparatus where ethanol is fed in a continuous run.

It was a sealed tube in a furnace:
Quote:
If not stated otherwise the reaction mixture was heated for eight hours in a closed tube in a Carius oven at a temperature of 155°-160°.


I shared the paper because of the data set. Maybe a strating point for an alternative procedure.

Edit: I'll leave the typo as it is, as we would be building a new method on top of the previous ones, just like the geological strata are formed.

[Edited on 17-5-2024 by bnull]

digga - 17-5-2024 at 06:15

Could evaporative loss of ether be reduced by using a smaller receiving flask? It seems to me that the rate of evaporation is directly affected by how much ether is exposed to air. As well, an ether/air mixture is a fuel air explosive where the fuel's flash point is below the temperature of the receiving flask. A smaller vessel means a smaller explosion.

Love the "where does the sulfur go?" discussion. Byproducts are products too.

GREAT POST.

[Edited on 17-5-2024 by digga]

Fery - 18-5-2024 at 00:57

Great experiment !!!
I had also similar experience when synthesizing 1,4 dioxane from ethylene glycol, I reduced the amount of H2SO4 about thrice, the reaction was smooth, yield good, side reactions reduced https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=65...
The vapor escaping from reaction flask carries out some unreacted ethanol. I wonder whether adding an intermediate reflux condenser (Liebig type) with cooling liquid about 50 C (which could condense part of the unreacted ethanol but not the diethylether) could improve efficiency according the ethanol used. Then only dietheylether enriched and unreacted ethanol depleted vapor could leave this intermediate condenser and enter the final spiral condenser - some unreacted ethanol is returned back into the reaction flask (from the reflux Liebig condenser with 50 C cooling liquid, its bottom joint connected to the reaction flask and its upper joint connected to the final spiral condenser).
In ether synthesis they add some sand into the reaction flask. Could someone explain me the role of the sand? In the post by len1 he used a tube to deliver the etanol into the sand to the bottom of the reaction flask instead dripping onto the reaction surface - so the role of the sand is to prevent ethanol boiling out unreacted as b.p. of ethanol is much lower (78 C) than reaction temperature (140 C) ? Len1 wrote that in his experiment only 12% of the ethanol passed unreacted from the reaction flask. Diachrynic used magnetic stirring that could have similar effect - quickly mixing dripped ethanol into the reaction mixture thus reducing its evaporation from the surface.

Keras - 18-5-2024 at 11:24

Quote: Originally posted by unionised  
I'm fairly sure that adding a concentrated aqueous solution of sodium bisulphate to ethanol gives a precipitate of sodium sulphate and a solution of sulphuric acid. I doubt the reaction goes to completion; but it might go far enough to produce something from which you can distill ether


So I tried that today. Same setup, 10 mL erlenmeyer with straight tube on top acting as air-cooled condenser. Prepared a saturated solution of sodium bisulphate, 2 mL + 3 mL ethanol added. No dice. The ethanol just boils off with a lot of bumping (since I did experiment on the back of an envelope I used my hob for heating, no magnetic stirring). I stopped after a fair amount of liquid spurted from the top of the tube.

I then had another idea: I put 3 mL of saturated sodium bisulfate solution and let it boil until there was obviously less than 1 mL left – my reasoning being that the super-concentrated solution would boil at a temperature much higher than 100 °C, and probably in the 140 °C target range. Of course I had to eyeball all this, and once I estimated that the temperature was high enough I dropped ethanol from a pipette down the air condenser. But nothing really happened. Most of the drops just evaporated off instantly, and when I flooded the erlenmeyer with, say, 2 mL of ethanol, I still had no distinctive smell of ether, despite both liquid mixing (as evidenced by a precipitate of sodium bisulphate).

The solution was so concentrated that the small magnetic stir bar I had put in the erlenmeyer in hope it would avoid bumping (despite having no magnetic stirrer) was floating!

So once more, it’s a no for me. Might try with sulphamic acid next week.

clearly_not_atara - 18-5-2024 at 14:24

Everything that's old is new again:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=79548

I still think you'd get a much better yield of sulfuric acid from KHSO4, because K2SO4 is less soluble in water (12% w/w) than Na2SO4 (25% w/w) and does not form hydrates. Ideally you would cool the solution to maximize precipitation, then filter, and only then try to distill ether.

Keras - 18-5-2024 at 22:07

Quote: Originally posted by clearly_not_atara  
Everything that's old is new again:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=79548

I still think you'd get a much better yield of sulfuric acid from KHSO4, because K2SO4 is less soluble in water (12% w/w) than Na2SO4 (25% w/w) and does not form hydrates. Ideally you would cool the solution to maximize precipitation, then filter, and only then try to distill ether.


Let's assume we should use potassium bisulphate. Can it be made by reacting sodium bisulphate with potassium chloride?

[EDIT] I will try the IPA method described by Tjerk using 99+% IPA. This might lead to reasonably fairly concentrated sulphuric acid.

[Edited on 19-5-2024 by Keras]

chornedsnorkack - 19-5-2024 at 01:48

Consider the major wanted and unwanted reactions and unreactions involved.
The wanted reactions:

  1. 2C2H5OH+HX=(C2H5)2O+H3O++X-
  2. (C2H5)2O distilling over (neat bp 35)
  3. H2O distilling over (neat bp 100)

The unwanted reactions and unreactions:

  1. C2H5OH distilling over unreacted (neat bp 78)
  2. HX distilling over (depends on HX identity)
  3. C2H5OH+HX=C2H5X+H2O. A side route if followed by C2H5OH+C2H5X=(C2H5)2O+HX. A side reaction if C2H5X distils over
  4. C2H5OH+HX=C2H4+H3O++X-, with C2H4 distilling over (neat bp -104)
  5. 2C2H4=C4H8, and followups to tars
  6. Reactions altering the X, such as reducing X

So how do you choose X and other reaction conditions to minimize all the unwanted reactions and unreactions?

bnull - 19-5-2024 at 11:04

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
The unwanted reactions and unreactions:

  1. C2H5OH distilling over unreacted (neat bp 78)
  2. HX distilling over (depends on HX identity)
  3. C2H5OH+HX=C2H5X+H2O. A side route if followed by C2H5OH+C2H5X=(C2H5)2O+HX. A side reaction if C2H5X distils over
  4. C2H5OH+HX=C2H4+H3O++X-, with C2H4 distilling over (neat bp -104)
  5. 2C2H4=C4H8, and followups to tars
  6. Reactions altering the X, such as reducing X

A is unavoidable since the reaction proceeds at ~140 °C, and ethanol can always be recovered and reused in another batch. B only happens if HX forms an azeotrope with boiling point lesser than or equal to 140 °C, or if it is gaseous at that temperature. I'm not sure about C (probably because every time I see an X in a chemical equation I think of halogen; blame it on the books), but it could happen in case a volatile compound were formed with ethanol; boric acid, for example, forms volatile esters with some alcohols. D happens much above 140 °C, so temperature must be not be much higher than 140 °C. E may be a problem at temperatures above 140 °C. F is sure a problem. The important points really are B and F.

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  

So how do you choose X and other reaction conditions to minimize all the unwanted reactions and unreactions?

The formation of ether by acid catalysis involves the protonation of one molecule of ethanol, a nucleophilic substitution (SN2), and a deprotonation. So HX must not be a good oxidizer under the conditions of the distillation (F), must be a fixed substance (B), and a good proton donor. The temperature must be well controlled because of side reactions and such.

* * *


I suppose that carborane acid (H(CHB11Cl11) or H(CHB11F11), or the whole class) could work, maybe at lower temperatures. It's more of a guess than researched material, of course, and I'm aware that it is not easily obtainable by amateurs or hobbyists. Carborane acid is the strongest known acid (C. A. Reed, 'Carborane acids. New "strong yet gentle" acids for organic and inorganic chemistry'), capable of protonating CO2 (S. Cummings, H. P. Hratchian and C. A. Reed, "The Strongest Acid: Protonation of Carbon Dioxide") and alkanes (M. Nava et al. "The Strongest Brønsted Acid: Protonation of Alkanes by H(CHB11F11) at Room Temperature"). It most probably protonates ethanol.

Edit: Corrected a typo (again), added one more reference.

[Edited on 19-5-2024 by bnull]

Jenks - 19-5-2024 at 11:26

Phosphoric acid seems to be the obvious alternative to prevent reduction of the acid from being a problem.

Keras - 19-5-2024 at 12:12

Quote: Originally posted by Jenks  
Phosphoric acid seems to be the obvious alternative to prevent reduction of the acid from being a problem.


I already tried 75% phosphoric acid, but ethanol just boils unchanged from it.

Jenks - 19-5-2024 at 18:51

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
Quote: Originally posted by Jenks  
Phosphoric acid seems to be the obvious alternative to prevent reduction of the acid from being a problem.


I already tried 75% phosphoric acid, but ethanol just boils unchanged from it.

I'm surprised. This is useful to know. Maybe the dehydrating ability of sulfuric acid is driving the reaction. But Diachrynic wrote, "It can also be seen that the dilution of water is not limiting the reaction, as it distills off alongside the ether and alcohol in more or less a stable equilibrium, if it is allowed to do so." If the water is removed by distilling it as the azeotrope, the sulfuric acid is not needed for this. Maybe the ester intermediates are the key, and the mechanism is not as simple as protonation of ethanol.

[Edited on 20-5-2024 by Jenks]

[Edited on 20-5-2024 by Jenks]

Keras - 19-5-2024 at 23:31

Quote: Originally posted by Jenks  
Quote: Originally posted by Keras  

I already tried 75% phosphoric acid, but ethanol just boils unchanged from it.

I'm surprised. This is useful to know. Maybe the dehydrating ability of sulfuric acid is driving the reaction. But Diachrynic wrote, "It can also be seen that the dilution of water is not limiting the reaction, as it distills off alongside the ether and alcohol in more or less a stable equilibrium, if it is allowed to do so." If the water is removed by distilling it as the azeotrope, the sulfuric acid is not needed for this. Maybe the ester intermediates are the key, and the mechanism is not as simple as protonation of ethanol.


Yeah, there is obviously something specific about sulphuric acid.
I will try again in the following days and keep you posted.

bnull - 20-5-2024 at 05:04

Quote: Originally posted by Jenks  
If the water is removed by distilling it as the azeotrope, the sulfuric acid is not needed for this. Maybe the ester intermediates are the key, and the mechanism is not as simple as protonation of ethanol.

Protonation of ethanol is the crucial step (see, for example, https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Organic_Chemistry/Or...); otherwise there is no reaction. Sulfuric acid is needed because it is a strong acid and consequently a good proton donor, and is also non-volatile. Other common strong acids (HCl, HNO3) are volatile and boil off well before the reaction temperature. Phosphoric acid is fixed but weak.

There are no ester intermediates. If that were indeed the case, phosphoric acid would work. Even boric acid would do.

[Edited on 20-5-2024 by bnull]

chornedsnorkack - 20-5-2024 at 09:19

Indeed. Compare the boiling point of 85% phosphoric and 85% sulphuric acid. They have the same molar mass - both are 50% by mole. The boiling point of 85% H3PO4 is quoted as 158 degrees - cannot quickly find a quote for 85% H2SO4 boiling point but from graphs looks around 215 degrees. Equimolar amount of sulphuric acid protonates water much more fully that phosphoric acid.
Strong monobasic acids like HClO4, CF3SO3H, ClSO3H and FSO3H are more volatile themselves because they have less bonds for hydrogen bond network. (And ClSO3H and FSO3H hydrolyze in water anyway). The one acid whose strength is close (slightly lower) and volatility similarly small is H2SeO4, and it is more oxidizing.

RU_KLO - 22-5-2024 at 05:10

Quote: Originally posted by clearly_not_atara  
Quote:
The best catalyst was ferric sulfate

A line from the paper I won't soon forget


I want to test the ether "pipe" procedure.

This is the main idea:

For this Im going to use a 1 inch threaded gas pipe (its used for Home gas instalation)
(check picture)

96º EtOH + Fe2SO4 will be poured inside the pipe, screwed (with teflon tape).
An then put in a oil bath at 150ºC (it will be put at ambient temperature and then heated)

after 8 hours, it will be removed from the bath, cooled (ice water), filtered and meassured.

Now the problems:
(I dont want to have a solvent granade in hot oil....)

1) the pipe:
I meassured 1mm thickness at the thread root. (from the rust I think they are made of iron, but regulations states: it should be form steel and test are 50 bars at room temp for 5 s. and for 1 inch pipe, thickness 2.9mm)
The thread is another problem. Checked without teflon tape (for volume with water) and it was like a wathering can.
From what I read Teflon will hold on 150C. Also maybe I will use high temp silicon seal (up to 240ºC)


Could the pressure be calculated? 150ºC + 70 ml EtOH (some converted to ether - lets hope - maybe some ethylene

Here Im in a field I dont know, so if mistakes are made, please correct.

form this calculator:
http://ddbonline.ddbst.com/AntoineCalculation/AntoineCalcula...

Temperature [°C] Pressure(1) [mmHg] Pressure(2) [mmHg]
150 T > Tmax 7355.67

from google:
7355 mmHg -> 9.8 Bar

so if this should pass a 50 bar test (although 5 s), I think its safe.

Will it hold?

If there is a leak because bubbles are seen from the thread.(because of pressure)
How will react ether/ethanol gas to 150C vegetable oil? (ignite? boil off? dissolve?)

Does someone could share broken glassware - high flamable solvent(if ether better) - oil bath experience, to expect the worst?
How it is mitigated?

thanks

pipe.jpg - 86kB

bnull - 22-5-2024 at 06:13

Quote: Originally posted by RU_KLO  
I want to test the ether "pipe" procedure.

This is the main idea:

For this Im going to use a 1 inch threaded gas pipe (its used for Home gas instalation)
(check picture)

96º EtOH + Fe2SO4 will be poured inside the pipe, screwed (with teflon tape).
An then put in a oil bath at 150ºC (it will be put at ambient temperature and then heated)

after 8 hours, it will be removed from the bath, cooled (ice water), filtered and meassured.

Good Lord! I'm glad you asked before proceeding. Ferric sulfate (Fe2(SO4)3) will corrode the steel pipe. The reaction, as far as I can see, is $$Fe_2(SO_4)_3+Fe^0\rightarrow3FeSO_4.$$ There's a big chance the threads will corrode from the inside to the end and you know what happens. Also, the sealed or closed tube is a glass tube with thick walls into which the substances are poured and the open end is sealed in the same manner as an ampoule. Then the tube is put inside a steel pipe or something similar to contain an eventual explosion.

Consult references on the sealed tube or Carius tube or the pipe bomb technique before actually trying. It seems there are plenty in the old books in the Library; selaed tube techniques are older than Quantum Physics.

As I wrote somewhere else, you can always buy new equipment but can't buy new fingers. I may be--and probably am--overestimating the risks. But safety is safety.

RU_KLO - 22-5-2024 at 06:22

Quote: Originally posted by bnull  

Good Lord! I'm glad you asked before proceeding. Ferric sulfate (Fe2(SO4)3) will corrode the steel pipe.


Do you think that 10 gr Fe2(SO4)3 in 70ml EtOH will make a hole (or compromise seal) in a 1mm steel pipe 8hs 150C?


bnull - 22-5-2024 at 06:27

Yep.

Keras - 22-5-2024 at 11:13

So I decided to give a go at the standard procedure using a less concentrated sulphuric acid. I took a bottle of 37% battery sulphuric acid, distilled it at the max temp. of my hot plate/stirrer (280 °C, but I suppose the liquid was not that hot), got about half the water out. So that should’ve left me with 74% acid. Let's say 65% is more reasonable.

I used that ~ 15 mL to try get ether from 10 mL of ethanol. Definitely I got ether, judging by the smell. But the distillation took forever and what I collected was ether in water, not water in ether. Nothing useable. Re-distillation of the product yielded nothing, no 36 °C perceptible stop, barely a small notch around 50 °C.

So, what seems to happen when you don’t use concentrated acid able to pull out water from the mix is that you have to face Le Châtelier's law. Since ether creation also makes one molecule of water, any water present drives the reaction backwards. Concentrated sulphuric acid both serves as a source of proton for protonating ethanol AND as a water absorbant. Once its dehydrating properties are lost (~85% ???) the reaction is much less vigorous.

Rainwater - 22-5-2024 at 17:02

When doing the pipe bomb method with other experiments i install a small brazed tube with lots of length, . I like the 1/8ID soft copper tubing. Connected to one of the caps, it allows you to have a pressure gauge and valve to collect products and monitor the reaction.
Forming a gas product inside a sealed reaction vessel makes a positive feedback loop,
increase in pressure, which increases temperature, which increases reaction speed, which increases pressure which goes boom. This process can also be illegal in some states without a license and the reactor may also require state certification. A 1in tube can pack a serious punch, you may wish to start on a smaller scale. The conversion from liquid water to steam will be in the ball park of 1mlliquid = 1700mlgas not sure how to calculate what your numbers will be, google the ideal gas laws if you want to figure out the pressure. It will be a lot.
Once you have accurate numbers, factor in a 80-120% safety margin and you can safely build a reactor.

Edit:
If all else fails, do your experiments in a hole in the ground. Ensure it is deep enough so the top of your appratus forms an angle of inclination that will limit the fallout to an acceptable area.

[Edited on 23-5-2024 by Rainwater]

clearly_not_atara - 23-5-2024 at 05:41

If you want to use a phosphoric-based catalyst for this rxn you should dehydrate the phosphoric acid to polyphosphoric acid first and then add ethanol, clearly 85% H3PO4 will not work but 100% H4P2O7 just might.
Quote: Originally posted by bnull  
you can always buy new equipment but can't buy new fingers.
ding ding ding

Keras - 23-5-2024 at 11:12

I’ll try to make 100% phosphoric acid with, say, 25 mL of my 75% bottle and add phosphorus pentoxide.

If I’m not mistaken: 3 H₂O + P₂O₅ → 2 H₃PO₄.

So, d = 1.58. 25 mL are therefore ca. 40 g. So 10 g of water, M = 18, 0.67 mol / 3 = 0.222 mol of phosphorus pentoxide, M = 142 g/mol, that makes 31.5 g.

Still quite a lot into a measly 25 mL.

clearly_not_atara - 23-5-2024 at 14:09

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
I’ll try to make 100% phosphoric acid with, say, 25 mL of my 75% bottle and add phosphorus pentoxide.

If I’m not mistaken: 3 H₂O + P₂O₅ → 2 H₃PO₄.

So, d = 1.58. 25 mL are therefore ca. 40 g. So 10 g of water, M = 18, 0.67 mol / 3 = 0.222 mol of phosphorus pentoxide, M = 142 g/mol, that makes 31.5 g.

Still quite a lot into a measly 25 mL.

I don't think this will be nearly strong enough! The diphosphoric acid H4P2O7 is an interesting reference point because it forms a pure crystal with a relatively high mp while solutions of polyphosphoric acids which are more or less concentrated tend to form thick gels at rt. Pure H3PO4 essentially does not exist; it disproportionates into a mixture of water, phosphoric acid and polyphosphoric acids (though the majority of this solution is H3PO4). 85% is the highest concentration of H3PO4 which can be achieved that does not contain significant amounts of H4P2O7. See e.g.:

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/i260053a014

"high-purity, crystalline, free-flowing pyrophosphoric acid" sounds much nicer than the usual sticky crap

[Edited on 23-5-2024 by clearly_not_atara]

chornedsnorkack - 23-5-2024 at 14:17

Quote: Originally posted by clearly_not_atara  
Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
I’ll try to make 100% phosphoric acid with, say, 25 mL of my 75% bottle and add phosphorus pentoxide.

If I’m not mistaken: 3 H₂O + P₂O₅ → 2 H₃PO₄.

So, d = 1.58. 25 mL are therefore ca. 40 g. So 10 g of water, M = 18, 0.67 mol / 3 = 0.222 mol of phosphorus pentoxide, M = 142 g/mol, that makes 31.5 g.

Still quite a lot into a measly 25 mL.

I don't think this will be nearly strong enough! The diphosphoric acid H4P2O7 is an interesting reference point because it forms a pure crystal with a relatively high mp while solutions of polyphosphoric acids which are more or less concentrated tend to form thick gels at rt. Pure H3PO4 essentially does not exist; it disproportionates into a mixture of water, phosphoric acid and polyphosphoric acids (though the majority of this solution is H3PO4). 85% is the highest concentration of H3PO4 which can be achieved that does not contain significant amounts of H4P2O7. See e.g.:

I gather that pure H3PO4 does exist, because the disproportionation you mention is kinetically slow. This is why H3PO4, like S, has two melting points, too...

clearly_not_atara - 23-5-2024 at 14:28

I see you've put in time in the Central Bureaucracy :P

Mateo_swe - 24-5-2024 at 01:51

According to the included paper alcohol + anhydrous ferric sulphate is most effective with a yield of 75% of ether.
"Three cm3 alcohol and 13 cm3 ether were obtained from 4 g ferric sulphate and 20 cm3 alcohol (96 %). The yield was 75 %."
Its an old but intresting paper.

Only problem is the procedure,
"the reaction mixture was heated for eight hours in a closed tube in a Carius oven at a temperature of
155°C- 160°C. When cooled down, the tube was opened, the mixture fractionated by means of a Vigreux column."

Will this work in a non closed vessel like ordinary glassware with reflux condenser?


Attachment: J. van Alphen - The formation of ether from alcohol.pdf (428kB)
This file has been downloaded 132 times


Rainwater - 24-5-2024 at 10:08

Quote: Originally posted by Mateo_swe  

Will this work in a non closed vessel like ordinary glassware with reflux condenser?

Likely but controlling the losses do to evaporation will be harder, the difference in pressure will have an effect of the reaction kinetics.

A simple pressure estimate for a closed vessel.
Couldnt find a one stop source for these values https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/
Ethanol at 160c 10-15bar or 217psi
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diethyl_ether_(data_page)
Diethyl ether @ 156c 15200 mmHg or 295psi
So the regular black steel pipe will hold that pressure at that temperature(7500psi 1" sch 40). But as you noted before the caps are the weak point. A welded fitting would exceed the pipe rating.
A threaded fitting, standard at best will be 300psi at room temperature, then downgraded 5% per 10c so your looking at
150c-30c = 120
Every 10 degrees derate 5%, so thats 12 derateings
So 300start pressure * (0.95derated factor^(12# of deratings)) drum roll.... 162psi before applying a safety factor which would knock it down to abou 130psi.
Im going to go ahead and say this can not be safelydone with standard fittings from the hardware store. You can order high pressure/tempature fittings what will easily handle 1000+psi. They cost about 4x as much, but for a simple 1in reactor your looking at $40 + S&H

[Edited on 24-5-2024 by Rainwater]

RU_KLO - 27-5-2024 at 09:26

Quote: Originally posted by Rainwater  
Quote: Originally posted by Mateo_swe  

Will this work in a non closed vessel like ordinary glassware with reflux condenser?

Likely but controlling the losses do to evaporation will be harder, the difference in pressure will have an effect of the reaction kinetics.

A simple pressure estimate for a closed vessel.
Couldnt find a one stop source for these values https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/
Ethanol at 160c 10-15bar or 217psi
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diethyl_ether_(data_page)
Diethyl ether @ 156c 15200 mmHg or 295psi
So the regular black steel pipe will hold that pressure at that temperature(7500psi 1" sch 40). But as you noted before the caps are the weak point. A welded fitting would exceed the pipe rating.
A threaded fitting, standard at best will be 300psi at room temperature, then downgraded 5% per 10c so your looking at
150c-30c = 120
Every 10 degrees derate 5%, so thats 12 derateings
So 300start pressure * (0.95derated factor^(12# of deratings)) drum roll.... 162psi before applying a safety factor which would knock it down to abou 130psi.
Im going to go ahead and say this can not be safelydone with standard fittings from the hardware store. You can order high pressure/tempature fittings what will easily handle 1000+psi. They cost about 4x as much, but for a simple 1in reactor your looking at $40 + S&H

[Edited on 24-5-2024 by Rainwater]


What about a CO2 Fire extinguisher tube?
"CO2 gas is held in the fire extinguisher under pressure, normally around 55 bars at room temperature." (i.e: 797.708 Psi)

NFPA 10 :
"8.6.3.2 Dry chemical, dty powder, water, foam, and halogenated
agent discharge hose assemblies requiring a hydrostatic
pressure test shall be tested at 300 psi (2068 kPa) or at service
pressure, whichever is higher.
8.6.3.3 Low-pressure accessor·y hose used on wheeled extinguishers
shall be tested at 300 psi (2068 kPa) .
8.6.3.4 High-pressure accessory hose used on wheeled extinguishers
shall be tested at 3000 psi (20.68 MPa).
"



RU_KLO - 6-6-2024 at 08:47

recovering H2SO4 from Diethyl ether making.

It there a possibility to get/recover any usable H2SO4 from the "tar" of an classic H2SO4 - ethanol ether syntesis?

unionised - 6-6-2024 at 09:35

Can I just check?
Are you planning to cause a bang by allowing the ferric sulphate to attack the steel of the fire extinguisher?
There also seemed to be some talk of using pyrophosphoric acid, which not only (probably) won't work but attacks steel and glass and, for extra fun...

... makes the nerve as substitute tetraethyl pyrophosphate.

I suspect the yield would be bad.

But not bad enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyl_pyrophosphate

BAV Chem - 7-6-2024 at 01:09

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
Quote: Originally posted by Jenks  
Phosphoric acid seems to be the obvious alternative to prevent reduction of the acid from being a problem.


I already tried 75% phosphoric acid, but ethanol just boils unchanged from it.


Making ether using phosphoric acid is actually possible and i did that at one point. This was more than 3 years ago so I don't remember everything. Also I didn't write anything down back then so the following might not be the complete truth.

The acid I used back then was mostly polyphosphoric acids that I made by boiling it down as far as i could using my heating mantle (yes, I etched the flask a couple times). Making ether with that stuff doesn't work very well though. It starts out by first boiling off a bunch of ethanol which is probably because phosphoric acid doesn't have nearly as great an affinity for ethanol as sulfuric acid would. Somewhere at or above 140C (if memory serves) there was some ether produced but this didn't last long before all the ethanol was gone. On addition of more ethanol the mix boiled and splashed violently and most of the enthanol just distilled off. Pretty soon the production of ether was very slow and I think this was because most of the polyphosphoric acid was already hydrolyzed to a critical degree. Upon heating the mix way beyond 150C a whole load of ethylene was generated and the acid slowly lost its water again. After that point I think I tried adding more ethanol and doing the reaction at 140C as before and that did afford some more ether but the total yield was still terrible. I ran something like 500ml of ethanol through it and probably spent two days on it and got around 50ml of ether. I likely made more ethylene than ether and all in all it absolutely sucked in comparison to using sulfuric acid.

Keras - 7-6-2024 at 02:43

I have just tried to produce ether with the 100% phosphoric acid I made by dissolving the stoichiometric quantity of phosphorus pentoxide into 75% commercial phosphoric acid and I got exactly the same thing (picture). Most of what distills above 140+ (nothing does under) is ethanol, at ~75 °C. There is definitely ether, because the ethanol strongly smells of it. But when I’m redistilling the product (which I’m currently doing), everything passes at 75 °C+. Probably phosphoric acid doesn’t bind with ethanol, or something of the same ilk. It was promising though, because when I added an initial 5 mL of ethanol into the 5 mL of phosphoric acid, the solution warmed up. The phosphoric acid remained clear all along, there is no charring or tar like what we get with sulphuric acid (second picture).

I'd say that what is left after redistillation (I cut at 80 °C) is… smelling like pure ether, except it can’t be. I got strictly nothing at 36 °C, the solution was not even boiling.

Is there any test I can carry out to identify the ether contents, apart from smelling?

PS: If I remember correctly, ether is industrially made by passing ethanol vapours over solid phosphoric acid. Very different conditions.

IMG_2307.jpeg - 3.1MB IMG_2308.jpeg - 3.3MB

[Edited on 7-6-2024 by Keras]

What have we got so far

bnull - 7-6-2024 at 05:50

I thought it would be good to condense what has been discussed, what works and what does not.

  1. Sulfuric acid is the classical catalyst, although it degrades and side reactions occur. The temperature must be right, around 140 °C; too low and either ethanol just boils off or the yield of ether is very poor; too high and you'll be losing ethanol as ethylene. Not to mention The Tar.

  2. The formation of ether using sulfuric acid starts with protonation of ethanol. It is the first and most crucial step. No esters are involved since they appear because of the side reactions. Sulfuric acid is both a good protonator and a good dehydrating agent and that's why it works. Other mechanisms are possible with other catalysts but, since we're dealing with sulfuric acid, protonation is still the first step.

  3. Sulfuric acid is also fixed (non volatile), it doesn't distill along with the products.

  4. Phosphoric acid and its cousins are fixed but not strong enough to be proposed as substitutes for sulfuric acid, and the yield is terrible. Other stong acids are either volatile (HCl, HNO3) or good oxidisers (H2SeO4, HClO4), or both. You must avoid the oxidisers at all costs because you're interested in ether, not aldehydes or carboxylic acids or "chemically-promoted relocation of lab equipment".

  5. The reaction may be carried out in sealed tubes, which are thick-walled glass tubes, other materials being attacked by hot acids. Other substances work as catalysts, such as ferric sulfate (I guess I know why but I don't want to make an ass of myself again without a good reason). The tubes are sealed because of the high pressures needed. A metal container, such as a capped pipe section or a fire extinguisher, will be corroded; if you're lucky, the result is a sludge of iron oxides and sulfates in ethanol with perhaps a smidgen of ether inside a pitted container; if you're out of luck, mayhem befalls.

  6. The side reactions range from obnoxious (The Tar) to wasteful (ethylene) and, in the case of pyrophosphoric acid, TEPP and a wink from Fritz Haber.

Am I missing something?

If we're to keep using sulfuric acid, so far the best catalyst in ether production, we'll need an additive. I list here some desirable characteristics of the additive. It is not an exhaustive list. If someone else has any other characteristic to suggest, please do.
  1. It must not react with ethanol, unless the product formed is in the pathway of ether formation.
  2. It must be stable in the presence of hot sulfuric acid.
  3. It must not react with sulfuric acid, unless the product is in the pathway of ether formation.
  4. It must be fixed so we don't need to separate it from the distillate.
  5. It must prevent or at least reduce the oxidation of ethanol by sulfuric acid.
  6. It must not form volatile esters with ethanol.
  7. It may be either solid or liquid. If liquid, it should be completely miscible; the reaction flask looking like a lava lamp could be a problem.



On the other hand, if we had two substances A and B which react with ethanol and among themselves, it could be a solution. Let's suppose that A reacts with ethanol to form compound EtOA@, and B reacts with ethanol to form compound EtB$. If we then add EtOA@ to EtB$, the products are ether and A@B$, being ether volatile and A@B$ fixed. A bonus would be if we could regenerate A and B from the latter, perhaps by electrolysis or reactions involving less regulated reagents. A Williamson synthesis, for example, uses sodium as A and a halogen as B. But it is more cumbersome and expensive (and probably dangerous) than simply boiling ethanol in sulfuric acid. Again, if someone can suggest a pair (A, B) of substances, please do.

RU_KLO - 7-6-2024 at 05:59

Quote: Originally posted by unionised  
Can I just check?
Are you planning to cause a bang by allowing the ferric sulphate to attack the steel of the fire extinguisher?


No, no. It was more like an "academic" question. After Bnulls post, understand it.

The problem is that I need some ether for inorganic analytical chemistry, and also concentrated sulfuric acid. Both regents are difficult to get in my country, they are restricted, special costly permits, you need an chemical engineer to sign the papers, etc. (Of course concentrated sulfuric acid is way more needed than ether.)

So any process for getting ether without sulfuric acid, is welcome.

On searching found that: Diethyl Ether and Sodium Chloride are formed when Sodium Ethoxide and Chloroethane react (Williamson Ether Synthesis)

Sodium Ethoxide: NaOH + ethanol
Chloroethane : HCl + ethanol

(Chloroethane: Toxic/flammable -

Chloroethane is produced by hydrochlorination of ethylene:
C2H4 + HCl → C2H5Cl
At various times in the past, chloroethane has also been produced from ethanol and hydrochloric acid, from ethane and chlorine, or from ethanol and phosphorus trichloride, but these routes are no longer economical.

Is this route viable for amateur (or is very dangerous - more dangerous than ethanol sulfuric acid?

found this in the forum:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=79850&...

From PrepChem, with references:

Preparation of ethyl chloride:

To the round bottom flask fitted with properly cooled reflux condenser and gas inlet 100 g of ethyl alcohol and 50 g of anhydrous zinc chloride are placed. The top of reflux condenser is connected to two washing bottles. The first has water and the second concentrated sulfuric acid. Finally apparatus is connected to a cooled flask for condensing the reaction product. A dry stream of hydrogen chloride gas is passed through the boiling mixture. The vapors of ethyl chloride is washed with water, concentrated sulfuric and condensed in a flask which is cooled with freezing mixture of ice and salt. As ethyl chloride boils at 12° C it must be kept in sealed glass tubes. The yield is almost quantitative.

Preparation of organic compounds, E. de. Barry Barnett, 71, 1912

So its not an easy task.... (instead of the second H2SO4 washing flask, sodium ethoxide would be used...)




[Edited on 7-6-2024 by RU_KLO]

bnull - 7-6-2024 at 09:43

Quote: Originally posted by RU_KLO  
So its not an easy task.... (instead of the second H2SO4 washing flask, sodium ethoxide would be used...)

The first flask is to absorb unreacted ethanol and hydrogen chloride. The second is to absorb water. Without the second flask, the sodium ethoxide will decompose.

I bought some 20 years ago (I'm quite old, you see) a small bottle of ether:ethanol 50:50. It was sold to remove surgical tapes (because, if you try to remove them, depending on the way you pull them and where they are stuck, you take out a nice patch of skin still glued to the tape; not much fun and hurts like hell meanwhile and afterwards. And yes, that was the time when I set my hand on fire accidentally). It's possible you can find the same kind of solution in a drugstore, a pharmacy, a chemist's (English is a mess), or a supplier of surgical materials, only remaining the question of separation of ether and ethanol.

Keras - 7-6-2024 at 11:03

As far as I know, Williamson’s ether synthesis has mediocre yields in the best cases.
(See anisole by ChemPlayer or NileRed)
Might be better with sodium ethoxide, which must be a stronger base than sodium phenoxide.

RU_KLO - 7-6-2024 at 13:48

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
As far as I know, Williamson’s ether synthesis has mediocre yields in the best cases.


To help mitigate this issue microwave-enhanced technology is now being utilized to speed up the reaction times for reactions such as the Williamson ether synthesis. This technology has transformed reaction times that required reflux of at least 1.5 hours to a quick 10-minute microwave run at 130 °C and this has increased the yield of ether synthesized from a range of 6-29% to 20-55% (data was compiled from several different lab sections incorporating the technology in their syntheses)

Baar, Marsha R.; Falcone, Danielle; Gordon, Christopher (2010). Microwave-Enhanced Organic Syntheses for the Undergraduate Laboratory: Diels−Alder Cycloaddition, Wittig Reaction, and Williamson Ether Synthesis. Journal of Chemical Education, 87(1), 84–86. doi:10.1021/ed800001x

as Keras said, 30% is not much for all the trouble...
Also putting flammable liquids into a microwave doesnt seem to safe...


Attachment: ed800001x.pdf (611kB)
This file has been downloaded 146 times


Keras - 8-6-2024 at 00:20

Quote: Originally posted by RU_KLO  
This technology has transformed reaction times that required reflux of at least 1.5 hours to a quick 10-minute microwave run at 130 °C and this has increased the yield of ether synthesized from a range of 6-29% to 20-55% (data was compiled from several different lab sections incorporating the technology in their syntheses)


Thanks for the pointer. The yield remains moderate at best and, above all, I don’t know about any commercial (kitchen) microwave oven that allows to precisely control the temperature of the heated compound inside – and I don’t think that the common way to regulate the average power, i.e. duty cycling, is really adapted vs. a continuous power-regulated microwave source.

chornedsnorkack - 10-6-2024 at 08:39

How much heat does solvation of ethanol achieve by itself, and at which concentration?
Water gives about 160 Celsius around 85 % sulphuric acid. Ethanol has a bigger molar heat capacity than water (if lower heat capacity by mass).
Also sulphuric acid/water solution reaches boiling point of about 165 Celsius, which is 65 degrees above pure water, at 70% by mass... which is about 2,3 moles of water per mole of sulphuric acid. At what concentration can ethanol/sulphuric acid solution be heated to 140 Celsius (62 degrees above pure ethanol) without boiling?

[Edited on 10-6-2024 by chornedsnorkack]

RU_KLO - 12-6-2024 at 05:25

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
How much heat does solvation of ethanol achieve by itself, and at which concentration?
Water gives about 160 Celsius around 85 % sulphuric acid. Ethanol has a bigger molar heat capacity than water (if lower heat capacity by mass).
Also sulphuric acid/water solution reaches boiling point of about 165 Celsius, which is 65 degrees above pure water, at 70% by mass... which is about 2,3 moles of water per mole of sulphuric acid. At what concentration can ethanol/sulphuric acid solution be heated to 140 Celsius (62 degrees above pure ethanol) without boiling?

[Edited on 10-6-2024 by chornedsnorkack]

I think is more complicated than that.

Found this, but under reduced pressure:

"For the sulfuric acid + water + ethanol system, the
boiling points increase with decreasing mole fractions of
ethanol in the solution at fixed ratios of sulfuric acid/water,
and they also increase as the ratio of sulfuric acid/water is
increased."

But for the same paper, it seems that Sulfuric acid could be recovered at lower temperature with butyl acetate (Acid + Water + Butyl Acetate + Ethanol Quaternary System

how difficult is to get/make Butyl acetate? From wikipedia: It is a component of fingernail polish.[8]
(I found ethyl acetate un fingernail polish, not butyk

the paper talks about models, but can someone "translate" this for non engineer people? in the sense, how do you apply it and what are the benefits.
Does the sulfuric acid destilates with the butyl acetate (and how to separate it) or the butyl acetates remains in the boiling flask with water?

Determination and Modeling of Vapor–Liquid Equilibria for the Sulfuric Acid + Water + Butyl Acetate + Ethanol System
Geng Li, Zhibao Li*, and Edouard Asselin

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ie303197a









Attachment: ie303197a.pdf (1MB)
This file has been downloaded 126 times


jackchem2001 - 13-6-2024 at 07:19

After experimenting with this procedure a little bit I would like to put something into text that is probably quite obvious - you can't just feed all of the distillate back into boiling flask and redistill to try enrich it in ether. You just end up fractionating the mixture. The matching of the addition rate and distillation rate is done because a high concentration of sulfuric acid raises the boiling point of the mixture (a likely requirement for a different catalyst in a simple distillation setup).

Unrelated, but has anybody else observed white smoke upon addition of ethanol to the boiling flask? Also, even though this contradicts the pdf posted on page 1 which casts doubt on alkylation agents as intermediates in this reaction, has anybody tried adding sodium sulfate to potential catalyse formation of sulfuric esters? (https://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=78772)

[Edited on 13-6-2024 by jackchem2001]

jackchem2001 - 3-7-2024 at 01:04

Continuing from my last post suggesting the addition of sodium sulfate to catalyse the formation of sulfuric esters (allowing a lower temperature to be used to avoid tarring), in ethyl bromide procedures diethyl ether is observed as a major impurity. Evidently, ethanol does react with some alkylating agents at much lower temperatures to give diethyl ether.

As I hate the smell of ether so I likely won't do this procedure again, but if anybody happens to be doing a run then consider adding a small amount of sodium sulfate to the boiler and report the results :)

MrDoctor - 5-7-2024 at 00:06

I have attempted this reaction and noticed something strange. thermal runaways.

At first i thought some sort of hydrolysis was occuring which could explain things, since i was using 95% ethanol, but i see now that water simply cannot accumilate in this reaction, which increases the mystery.

What i observed was that at seemingly arbitrary temperatures between each runaway, my PID controller would suddenly find itself unable to heat the acid solution further. it would get stuck at say, 140C. no reflux or enough distillate was comming over to explain the heat loss, i also re-attempted without a fractionating column thinking it was trapping the water leading to exothermic splitting/reformation of ethyl sulfate <-> sulfuric acid + ethanol. energy is being applied but it is not being reflected in a change of temperature, nor, any notable distillate although the head temp would begin to increase, but only after the runaway began, not leading up to it.

Suddenly, the column head temperature would skyrocket from the boiling point of ether to the boiling point of a low-ethanol +water steam, and the distillate would reflect as much. the addition of more ethanol during this runaway would instantly and increase the temperature.

eventually my acid tarred up and became so thick it would foam so i had to stop, but this phenomena occured long before any viscosity changes or clarity occured.


During a runaway, over the course of a minute, regardless of if the PID was still applying power, the temperature would suddenly rise from wherever it began, in this case, 140C, and it would rise up to around 156C. this temperature change did not correspond to any thermal-momentum, the lag between heat being generated by the mantle, and then transferring to where the thermometer could read it. it also occured in a span that almost matched how quickly the temperature would rise with a manunally set 100% duty cycle. (also yes i did verify the PID wasnt simply defective and suddenly locking on 100%)

ethanol was pumped in consistently by peri pump, shutting off automatically when the temperature had risen above 60C as i was concerned that ethanol would simply boil on the surface of the acid without reacting.


Eventually the runaways would accompany foaming that caused the ejection of the black thick acid so i had to stop. there was a major viscosity change after i tried to vacuum concentrate the acid, but this phenomena was present prior to that, i had just assumed the acid had become too diluted with water or something, since runaways would end with noticeable amounts of water in the condenser.

Does anyone know what was happening?

A successful semi-automated ether preparation and an exercise in tar chemistry

BAV Chem - 13-7-2024 at 05:53

So apparently the process described by Diachrynic does not work for everyone so far. I've done the procedure myself with a few minor changes and for me it worked out pretty much perfectly on the first try.

Setup: The reaction was carried out in basically the same way as described on page 1. To ensure a successful experiment only the highest quality reagents were used. The sulfuric acid was tar grade and recovered from previous experiments and as such it contained the boiled down remains of a hydrazine sulfate preparation (azine method) and a failed nitration mix amongst other things (Note 1). It was the nastiest sample of H2SO4 that could be found in the back of the storage shelf. This reagent's purity was determined to be a seven on the browning index as defined by Kahverengi et al.[1]
Similarly part of the ethanol was recovered from previous experiments or distilled from some exceptionally bad booze. Most of it however was store bought denatured alcohol (95%).

Procedure: A 3-neck 500ml RBF was charged with 50ml of sulfuric acid and 50ml of ethanol (Note 2). Heating was accomplished using a bath of melted candle wax with the hot plate set to nearly 200°C surface temp. The mix was constantly stirred and ethanol was added using an arduino controlled peristaltic pump system. This was set to run for 500ms at a time, which is equivalent to adding roughly 0.3 - 0.4ml of EtOH. Additions were automatically made whenever the reaction temperature was above 142°C with a minimum dead time of 15s between additions. A type K thermocouple was used to monitor the temperature inside the reaction flask. This technique worked out flawlessly and the temperature stayed within 0,5°C of the set temperature of 142°C for the majority of the experiment, that is assuming there was no drift in the thermocouple measurements. 4000ml or 3200g of 95% ethanol were added using the pump system before the reaction was stopped. Toward the end of the experiment there was quite a large amount of tar buildup in the flask and the mixture started to foam a little. It is also important to note that even at this point there was still a considerable amount of sulfuric acid left in the reaction flask and the experiment could've easily been continued.

Workup: The distillate obtained was fractionally distilled as described on page 1. Diethyl ether was collected up until 40°C and ethanol between 75°C and 80°C. A small amount of distillate came over while the temperature rose from the boiling point of ether to that of ethanol and this was simply included in the next batch.

Acid recovery: According to Evans and Foresman[2] about 79% of the sulfuric acid that is lost is still contained in the distillate as either sulfuric acid or diethyl sulfate. The latter of these two should at least partially hydrolyze to give the former so it was attempted to recover some of the lost acid by boiling down the residue from the fractional distillation. However this only yielded a small amount of black sludge that presumably consisted of mostly charred organics and some sulfuric acid. The corresponding browning score would have been an eight to nine.
The leftover sulfuric acid in the RBF was treated in a similar manner. It was boiled down and heated until most of the impurities were digested and the material returned to its typical viscosity. This way about 33ml of H2SO4 were recovered which was of similar quality as the starting material.

Results: In total 4050ml or 3240g of ethanol were used which was converted to 2936g or roughly 3500ml of crude distillate. Fractional distillation of the latter yielded 1175g or 1650ml of diethyl ether, 1500ml or 1200g of ethanol and 430ml of a watery residue (Note 3). With the distilled ethanol being the same concentration as the starting material this equates to a conversion efficiency of 75% (Note 4). Assuming the other 25% have been converted to ethylene the amount of water that would be expected to form can be calculated to be 473.8ml. The 430ml of H2O obtained thus equate to 91% of the expected amount so these numbers seem to make sense. 50ml of tar grade sulfuric acid were employed of which 33ml could be recovered. This puts the amount of acid that was actually lost to just 17ml. Without recovering the acid the volume of ether produced would've been 33x that of the sulfuric acid employed. Accounting for the recovered sulfuric acid this factor goes up to about 97 (Note 5). Also it seems that the quality of the acid used doesn't make too much of a difference.


Notes:
1) It is obviously not advisable to boil down nitration mixtures unless it can be done safely.
2) Interestingly the addition of ethanol to the acid led to some white fumes appearing in the reaction flask, exactly as described by jackchem2001[3], which is strange because no vapor phase reactions should occur here. I suspect it's just ethanol being vaporized from the exotherm of mixing H2SO4 and EtOH.
3) Diethyl sulfate which is apparently a byproduct of this reaction is said to have a peppermint like odor and this residue had a very weird smell that did in fact share some similarities with that of peppermint.
4) I was hoping for something more like 90% but oh well...
5) This figure may be subject to various measurement errors and might actually be somewhat lower.

References:
1) K. Kahverengi, M. de la Mierda, R. von Braun and G. Schlonk (2021) '50 Shades of Brown: An Index of Chemical Misery', J. Immat. Sci., 1, https://jabde.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/50-Shades-of-Br...
2) P. N. Evans, G. K. Foresman, "Sulphur By-Products of the Preparation of Ether", Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci. 1917, 27, 211-216, https://journals.indianapolis.iu.edu/index.php/ias/article/v...
3) https://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=78772

BAV Chem - 20-7-2024 at 15:03

We might not even need to search for an alternative catalyst although admittedly that would be a very interesting topic to look at. I recently tried my hand at the process of making sulfuric acid using ethanol and sodium bisulfate and things worked out quite well (see this thread).

tl;dr I obtained about 50ml of reasonably pure sulfuric acid from 250g of pool grade NaHSO4 which should be more than good enough to make liters of ether.

maybe better with a hot tube and H2SO4 on pumice?

Organikum - 27-7-2024 at 05:00

lugh from the HIVE once provided a German paper which I sadly do not have anymore but I have a still well working memory and the paper told this:

Ethanol vapors (~90% EtOH was used IIRC) were passed through a glass-tube heated to 135° - 150° C and filled with pumice pebbles soaked with 70% H2SO4, and the resulting mixture of water, ethanol and ether was condensed, the ether removed and the ethanol distilled from the water and returned to the feeding vessel.
They claimed up to 50% yield on ether per run whereby the higher the temperature the higher the yield but also more crap deposition on the pumice leading to shortened standing time of the catalyst. But at lower temperatures with 35% yield they claimed next to infinite (weeks) of activity.

This is the part I am sure about, more shaky is the following:
Tube was made of glass (I am sure of this), 3 to 5 cm diameter, pumice pebbles like 2-3 mm diameter and tube-length like 50 cm heated, catalyst filled.

To avoid massive temperature fluctuations it would be for sure best to immerse the tube into a liquid heating medium or maybe metal block and to use a rather thin walled tube. I wager thinner tube beats thicker tube one might consider a bundle of thinner tubes for a production setup.

But generally it works this is sure, I know it as I tried back then it in a quick and dirty test and there is absolutely no reason why it should not and with clean alcohol a high TOF seems plausible, a small setup running for days can produce copious amounts of ether I suppose. Put a flame-arrestor between boiling flask and hot tube and this should be quite save. As far as ether can be called save of course.
The integrated ethanol recovery - well I would skip this and I also would use absolute ethanol which I can buy for ethanol ovens cheap and easy (just condense out the MEK before use, add NaOH or KOH and let sit in a warm place for some weeks and use as is, I mean why distill when it gets distilled anyways?)


It for sure saves a lot of H2SO4 and the temperature in the hot tube is reasonable.
There is some back-pressure building up in the boiling flask that is understood, the pumice i must fill the tube completely to ensure contact, so clamp joints properly down and when using an addition funnel to refill, use a pressure equalized one.
Darn! I am tempted to build one myself, ether is still my favorite solvent, well as long the floor is not covered in eeri blue flames all of a sudden..... ;)

Hope somebody finds this interesting and there is not already a thread about it, I did not search tbh.

regards
/ORG

bnull - 27-7-2024 at 15:51

Quote: Originally posted by Organikum  
lugh from the HIVE once provided a German paper

I found it. It's a note in French (which at least I can read without Google): Jean-Baptiste Senderens, "Déshydratation catalytique, en phase gazeuse, des alcools forméniques en presence de la ponce sulfurique et phosphorique",Compt. Rend. 192, 1335-7(1931) (Source gallica.bnf.fr / BnF). It is short (3 pages) and small, so it is also attached (if someone happens to be too lazy or not curious enough to check out the Comptes Rendus).

I don't know what are the rules of Sciencemadness regarding content from The Hive but, since it is not cookery, here's the (sort of) original post.

Attachment: Senderens - Synthesis of ether using pumice stone soaked in sulfuric acid in a hot tube (more or less) (363kB)
This file has been downloaded 108 times

[Edited on 28-7-2024 by bnull]

wg48temp9 - 28-7-2024 at 03:06

Just in case, nobody has seen the papers on Silica sulfuric acid as Solid Acid Catalyst. It's used for esterification and for producing ethers.

Sorry, i could not find the paper. I will try again later

Organikum - 28-7-2024 at 05:02

Quote: Originally posted by bnull  
Quote: Originally posted by Organikum  
lugh from the HIVE once provided a German paper

I found it. It's a note in French (which at least I can read without Google): Jean-Baptiste Senderens, "Déshydratation catalytique, en phase gazeuse, des alcools forméniques en presence de la ponce sulfurique et phosphorique",Compt. Rend. 192, 1335-7(1931) (Source gallica.bnf.fr / BnF). It is short (3 pages) and small, so it is also attached (if someone happens to be too lazy or not curious enough to check out the Comptes Rendus).

I don't know what are the rules of Sciencemadness regarding content from The Hive but, since it is not cookery, here's the (sort of) original post.



[Edited on 28-7-2024 by bnull]


Thanks for the paper, nice you can read it, most can not so I tell the essence of it. And lo and behold! It is - so true - looking like the holy grail of ether production!

Pumice granules soaked in H2SO4 of 62% to 64% strength catalyze the dehydration of ethanol to ether at 135° C to 140 °C whereby the the dehydration is complete (if the stream of ethanol is adjusted accordingly and no side-reactions occur at 135°C, at 140° C small amounts of ethylene are formed.

They ran the reaction 8 days, 8 hours a day t 135° C with no degradation or tarring of the catalyst.
The pumice was in "nacelles" what I interpret as a bag of wire and heating was done electrically.


Now thats pretty neat, isn't it?

Oh, they also mention that sodium bisulfite does NOT work, what hopefully ends this myth once and for all.

Whats your problem with The HIVE? SCM has no limitations as long the posts are trying to follow scientific rules in wording and this refers to all posts be it energetic (physically) energetic (mentally) or washing your dishes.

regards
/ORG


PS: And for "cookery" let's quote Alexander Shulgin:
"Orbitals are for mathematicians, Organic Chemistry is for people who like to cook!"
:P

bnull - 28-7-2024 at 09:01

Quote: Originally posted by Organikum  
Thanks for the paper, nice you can read it, most can not so I tell the essence of it.

Being a Romance speaker has its advantages. Thanks for mentioning the paper anyway.

Quote: Originally posted by Organikum  
Pumice granules soaked in H2SO4 of 62% to 64% strength catalyze the dehydration of ethanol to ether at 135° C to 140 °C whereby the the dehydration is complete (if the stream of ethanol is adjusted accordingly and no side-reactions occur at 135°C, at 140° C small amounts of ethylene are formed.

They ran the reaction 8 days, 8 hours a day t 135° C with no degradation or tarring of the catalyst.
The pumice was in "nacelles" what I interpret as a bag of wire and heating was done electrically.

Now thats pretty neat, isn't it?

Oh, they also mention that sodium bisulfite does NOT work, what hopefully ends this myth once and for all.

Sodium bisulfate, but here Senderens was talking about passing alcohol vapor over heated sodium bisulfate, which doesn't mean that other processes involving it are doomed to failure. The main issue with bisulfate is that the catalytic dehydration of vapors ocurrs from 175 °C upwards, where ethylene, not ether, is the main product. In liquid phase, ethanol boils off unchanged in a common distillation setup at ambient pressure (Senderens again) but it is quite possible that it converts to ether in a sealed tube (a thought that occurred after reading van Alphen). The latter is not amateur-friendly, so while not exactly a myth until someone tries out the sealed tube method, the necessary conditions make it more interesting from a theoretical/academical point of view than a proper preparative method of large quantities of ether for the home chemist. It seems feasible with the right equipment but not at home with lab glassware or threaded pipes. And the "nacelles en porcelaine" are simply combustion boats made of porcelain, by the way.

Anyway. The process is quite neat and can be easily automated, with Arduino and stuff. An apparatus the size of a tabletop water cooler where you insert ethanol and receive ether. With a replaceable "sulfuric pumice" cartridge perhaps. Not bad. Not a holy grail but not bad either.

Quote: Originally posted by Organikum  
Whats your problem with The HIVE?

With the chemical aspects, none at all; I love Chemistry, and science in general. As for the recreational and commercial aspects and their legal developments, I don't effing care. I don't do or cook drugs or have problems with the Law itself or its supposed representatives. I don't really effing care. The problem is, there are delusional elements within the forum that become so paranoid at the briefest mention of drugs or drug-related content and sources (most of The Hive has been archived by Erowid, you see; no problem with that too) that they begin fearing for their lives and freedom as if the "drug police" were monitoring them 24/7 and ready to fall upon them in a sec just because they had read that content. In such state, they would start spewing their unreasonable fears (check out Detritus) in this thread while being annoying and unhelpful, and cheesing me and everyone else off in the process. Hence my excessive caution, like the monkey.

chornedsnorkack - 28-7-2024 at 23:18

Is it feasible to set up reactive distillation so that "no reaction" results in nothing distilling over - unreacted ethanol just flows back to the still?

Organikum - 29-7-2024 at 06:11

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
Is it feasible to set up reactive distillation so that "no reaction" results in nothing distilling over - unreacted ethanol just flows back to the still?

This makes not more sense on closer inspection then it made on first glance, maybe you try sorting your thoughts and understanding the process before posting?

Organikum - 29-7-2024 at 06:21

Quote: Originally posted by bnull  

....


Well we are talking about doable processes so bisulfite is obviously out - if you want to chase dead cows, well do it, but do not send others to do do it.

The HIVE as mentioned here shows that one does not have to be a druggie to be a paranoid fuck, this is long known, same the the bad effects drugs like LSD and Crystal Meth have on people who do not consume them but only came in contact via TV shows and YouTube.

regards
/ORG

bnull - 29-7-2024 at 09:36

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
Is it feasible to set up reactive distillation so that "no reaction" results in nothing distilling over - unreacted ethanol just flows back to the still?

No. As explained in the second paper by Senderens (Catalytic dehydration of alliphatic alcohols by alkaline bisulfates, in French), while a proper proportion of ethanol:sulfuric acid can be used so the solution can reach the reaction temperature (~140 °C), the same can't be done with sodium bisulfate because the increase in boiling temperature is negligible given the amounts of bisulfate used. This was verified by @Keras several posts ago. Even a paste made of bisulfate and ethanol would just dry up and the alcohol boil off unchanged.

So we're still dealing with sulfuric acid (with or without additives) and other possible substitutes at about 1 atm.

chornedsnorkack - 29-7-2024 at 11:28

Quote: Originally posted by Organikum  
Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
Is it feasible to set up reactive distillation so that "no reaction" results in nothing distilling over - unreacted ethanol just flows back to the still?

This makes not more sense on closer inspection then it made on first glance, maybe you try sorting your thoughts and understanding the process before posting?

You have offered two options:
  1. Entirely open apparatus - vapour is free to get out and liquid flow out at constant pressure regardless of any reaction with volume change - with free return inflow of air
  2. Rigidly closed apparatus - glass welded closed against pressure, no change of volume till the glass violently breaks

How about apparatus which allows only a small difference of pressure between inside and outside, which the glass and joints are designed to fit? Like a liquid lock?
Since the likely vapours to reach the gas lock (ethanol, ether, water) may dissolve in water and/or oil, a liquid lock proof of these might be a metal one (Hg or Ga based).
If there were no catalyst, or if the catalyst were completely insoluble in the liquid (like a solid superacid), bringing the reaction
2C2H5OH=(C2H5)2O+H2O to completion (but equilibrium would not be completion), the liquid would separate, and its boiling point would drop from 78,3 degrees to 34,2 degrees of ether/water azeotrope - meaning that at constant thermostat temperature, the ether would boil off and bubble through the liquid lock.
What we want is ethanol/sulphuric acid solution of such concentration that its boiling point is 140 degrees. What concentration is that? And if the reaction goes on, how much does its vapour pressure increase, at constant temperature?

bnull - 29-7-2024 at 15:57

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
You have offered two options

I guess it was I who offered those options, @chornedsnorkack. And yes, it was either a distillation setup open to the atmosphere, which is the original idea of the thread and the only safe (as hot sulfuric acid goes) option so far, or a sealed tube, which seems feasible with the right equipment (i.e., professional lab or industry) but not at home with lab glassware or threaded pipes, as I pointed a page ago. Since the quantities produced by the latter are inevitably too small (< 20 mL), it remains of theoretical interest.

So, we're stuck with (1) round-bottom flasks and condensers, (2) the sulfuric pumice boat method of Senderens, or (3) the solid acid catalyst mentioned by @wg48temp9. I have a vague impression of having read about (3) in the forum; memory fails me now.

Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
What we want is ethanol/sulphuric acid solution of such concentration that its boiling point is 140 degrees. What concentration is that? And if the reaction goes on, how much does its vapour pressure increase, at constant temperature?

Don't forget the water. There are so many compositions EtOH:H2SO4:H2O with the same minimum boiling point (it is a minimum because we need the solution to reach at least the reaction temperature). I remember seeing something in the forum, possibly by you, about those mixtures. Again, memory fails me.

BAV Chem - 30-7-2024 at 01:06

Quote: Originally posted by bnull  

No. As explained in the second paper by Senderens (Catalytic dehydration of alliphatic alcohols by alkaline bisulfates, in French), while a proper proportion of ethanol:sulfuric acid can be used so the solution can reach the reaction temperature (~140 °C), the same can't be done with sodium bisulfate because the increase in boiling temperature is negligible given the amounts of bisulfate used. This was verified by @Keras several posts ago. Even a paste made of bisulfate and ethanol would just dry up and the alcohol boil off unchanged.

So we're still dealing with sulfuric acid (with or without additives) and other possible substitutes at about 1 atm.


Just an alkaline bisulfate mixed with ethanol doesn't catalyze the dehydration of the alcohol to ether but I would argue this is only because the bisulfate itself does not raise the boiling point enough, and is not acidic enough to catalyze the reaction at an appropriate temperature. Also there's never gonna be enough free sulfuric acid in solution to do this because the eqilibrium of NaHSO4 <---> Na2SO4 usually lies too far on the left.
However if you were to filter off the sodium sulfate before doing the reaction it would likely work. I have done a similar thing but isolated the sulfuric acid instead of using it straigt away recently (see somewhere above) and it certainly seems practical. By adding something like 250g of sodium bisulfate to 500ml of ethanol, stirring, filtering and distilling it should be possible to obtain an impure but usable sulfuric acid concentrate that would be perfectly suitable for making ether. Yes, it's just the method from the first post with extra steps but it would allow us to start from bisulfate and not sulfuric acid. You could simply distill off the ethanol until the temp reaches 140°C and then add more ethanol as usual.


Quote: Originally posted by chornedsnorkack  
Is it feasible to set up reactive distillation so that "no reaction" results in nothing distilling over - unreacted ethanol just flows back to the still?


Wouldn't that be the same as a fractional distillation where the ethanol recondenses but ether distills over? Some people actually do it that way and get terrible conversion efficiencies out of their sulfuric acid because of water build up. However this brings me to a theoretically possible but frankly impractial idea. If you were to set up a distillation of sorts such that the ethanol would be returned without returning the water it should be doable. Tbh I have no good idea of how to do this. All I can think of would be a series of condensers, one running at 80-90°C to take out all the water, another one at like 60°C to take out the ethanol and one to finally condense the ether. That would basically be like building a miniature chemical plant that you would feed with ethanol and get out ether and water at the other end.

bnull - 30-7-2024 at 08:54

Quote: Originally posted by BAV Chem  
Just an alkaline bisulfate mixed with ethanol doesn't catalyze the dehydration of the alcohol to ether but I would argue this is only because the bisulfate itself does not raise the boiling point enough, and is not acidic enough to catalyze the reaction at an appropriate temperature.

There's also that.

Quote: Originally posted by BAV Chem  
However if you were to filter off the sodium sulfate before doing the reaction it would likely work. I have done a similar thing but isolated the sulfuric acid instead of using it straigt away recently (see somewhere above) and it certainly seems practical. (...) Yes, it's just the method from the first post with extra steps but it would allow us to start from bisulfate and not sulfuric acid. You could simply distill off the ethanol until the temp reaches 140°C and then add more ethanol as usual.

The "somewhere above" is this other thread, The simplest preparation of sulfuric acid?! Another instance of my memory failing.

Quote: Originally posted by BAV Chem  
Tbh I have no good idea of how to do this. All I can think of would be a series of condensers, one running at 80-90°C to take out all the water, another one at like 60°C to take out the ethanol and one to finally condense the ether. That would basically be like building a miniature chemical plant that you would feed with ethanol and get out ether and water at the other end.

Something like the drawing below? The collectors look familiar...

plant.jpg - 299kB

Pumukli - 30-7-2024 at 10:12

There"s a synth description in Org. Synth somewhere (phorone? diacetone-alcohol?) in which before they let wet acetone dripping back from the reflux condenser to the flask they let it percolate through dry, anhydrous BaO in a perforated "cup" or something like that.

Something similar, maybe filled with anhydrous Na2SO4 might work with wet ethanol.

EF2000 - 31-7-2024 at 06:12

Like that: https://www.orgsyn.org/demo.aspx?prep=CV1P0199

Synthesis of diacetone alcohol. They use Soxhlet extractor with thimbles filled with Ba(OH)2.

Organikum - 8-8-2024 at 03:05

Quote: Originally posted by BAV Chem  
if in doubt, try it out


Bisulfite did not work for anybody in a meaningful way, why do you not just follow your own advice? And try it out before repeating the old "should, would, might" mantra?

The H2SO4 pumice works I can vouch for it. And it is much safer for having a very small actual reaction volume. Not to talk of the excellent TOF if good quality alcohol is used.

Why is this, people always sending others on hopeless quests like this bisulfite crap?

"If in doubt, try it out!"
Absolutely.

macckone - 10-8-2024 at 19:53

I have done the bisulfate method and produced ethyl ether.
You need DRY sodium bisulfate which is an added prep step. Out of the bag it contains more water than the monohydrate.
You do not dissolve the sodium bisulfate, you make a slush of ethanol and the powder.
Then you heat under heavy reflux until the slush is 140C.
Next you drip in additional ethanol. It is much slower than the sulfuric acid method.

I am uncertain as to the exact mechanism since this not been studied since sulfuric acid is readily available for most people outside of the EU and that is recent.
My guess is that it is producing sulfuric acid in situ.
It is not as easy or fool proof as the sulfuric acid method.
It also builds up water quickly and the reaction ceases when it gets too 'wet'.
Doing this on a 10ml scale and expecting results is insane. I used a 1L RBF with about half filled with sodium bisulfate before adding ethanol.

I was on the verge of screaming at the number of times people said bisulfite in this thread. That is NOT what you need.

As for references, I originally got the idea from Mellor's.
It was mentioned that it produced less tar which was my primary interest in it.
The tar clean up is the worst. It requires piranha solution.

From a practical perspective, boiling down dilute acid is easier and will yield better results. Extracting the sulfuric acid from the sodium bisulfate would be more reliable.

While this does work it is neither practical nor preferable if you have access to sulfuric acid. And given that you can extract sulfuric acid from sodium bisulfate, you basically have access to sulfuric acid. You can also boil down 15% acid to get concentrated acid, which my understanding is that 15% is available in the EU.

When I get time I need to do a proper write up so it is reproducible.

A few other notes about ethyl ether formation:

the diethyl sulfate decomposes to diethyl ether and sulfur trioxide when heated. So the ester formation is at least one pathway in the traditional sulfuric acid method.

The ethyl hydrogen sulfate reacts with sodium sulfate to produce diethyl sulfate and sodium bisulfate.

oleum and ethyl ether produce significant tar when heated together.

Sodium sulfate can sequester a substantial amount of water. The commercial technical grade sodium bisulfate probably contains significant amounts of sodium sulfate decahydrate out of the bag explaining the need to dry it.

MrDoctor - 5-9-2024 at 22:23

I attempted to produce ether again, i dont recall how much i produced from how much ethanol overall, only that i now have well over a litre and am happy, kind of.
I made a change to the automated process and, it seems kind of stupid in hindsight. When you introduce a PID to an immovable object so to speak, if it is integrating, it becomes not only an unstoppable force, but one that develops an unreasonable amount of momentum too. In short i cranked up the proportional gain about 20x what it was and turned I and D to zero and everything worked almost perfectly after that since it wouldnt try harder just because it was spending too much time below the setpoint. it was now always stable around 3-5C below the setpoint unable to ever reach it.

I have also since learned some sources state not to control this reaction based on the temperature of the acid-ethanol but rather, only by bath temperature, and to pretty much ignore the temperature of the acid. In my opinion now, this reaction cannot, or should not be done without a bath of some sort, or, direct heat shouldnt be used. over the course of the reaction, the boiling point of the acid will change, or in my case did change anyway.

Another change i implemented was using a disposable glass pipette to introduce the ethanol about half way below the surface of the acid, i just kind of had a gut feeling and it paid off, adding ethanol below the surface resulted in an increased rate of production.
testing ether % with cold calcium chloride solution, while limiting the head temperature to that below ethanols bp, ether % went up from 35-40% to 65% and along with it, the actual flow rate too.
I also noted the effect of simply letting the head run hotter up to 75C, more distillate came over and more ethanol was permitted to flow in, (head temp just goes up with ethanol in anyway) but i was still seeing roughly the same amount of ether production, about 0.65ml/minute. switching to pumping in ethanol under the acid however increased the output to 0.75ml/min for the limited time i was able to do that.

Im currently working on using activated alumina in a nice metal reactor but ill be trying sulfuric acid again because the improvements i made didnt generate very many results, it was good but i ran out of ethanol and i want to verify exactly what impact head temperature, the use of a bath, and adding ethanol below the surface rather than above, would have.
I also need to confirm something, i used a brand of methylated spirits called KCB, they dont disclaim what denaturants are used unlike a more expensive MiBK based one i can get uses.
Im not huffing this ether, but i have noticed that unlike the first batch i originally made (i recorded nothing), this ether is incredibly bitter on the tongue, i noticed this not by deliberately inhaling it but just by being in proximity. When i purified the ethanol for this i distilled once once to produce a damn near drinkable product if not for the chemical taste from what i assume is some kind of ketone, however absolutely bitterness free.
Then i stored the distilled ethanol over KOH for a day, and distilled it again to remove ketones. no noteworthy changes. my objective though was to eliminate anything that might produce tar. less tar did form.

Once again, the ether vapor produced was as bitter as what was made before with the previous batch. simply opening the bottle away from the hood, it was worse than getting blowback while cleaning windows with spirits in a spray bottle. The only difference is it doesnt linger, unlike denatonium exposure. its like whatever is doing this is volatile.

twice distilling the ether after bicarb, brine wash and drying, nothing changed, i cant imagine that its somehow got traces of denatonium in there that it has potentiated, and is now somehow forming an azeotrope with.

The other day i made some vials with sodium carbonate, citric acid, and wet and dry activated charcoal, none had any effect either, they are control measures i have heard some say work on the denatonium in spirits.

i dont know of any reports of other ethers regardless of whether they might co-distill, being particularly bitter, much less that they let you taste it freely from the air just by mouth breathing in the same room as an open bottle.
Given though that whatever this is hasnt altered the boiling point, doesnt leave residue, is resistant to conc sulfuric acid and KOH, and is basically impossible to identify or interact with at all, i wonder if at this point its safe to just ignore.

jackchem2001 - 6-9-2024 at 18:06

Quote: Originally posted by MrDoctor  

testing ether % with cold calcium chloride solution, while limiting the head temperature to that below ethanols bp, ether % went up from 35-40% to 65% and along with it, the actual flow rate too.


Your calcium chloride testing method sounds good. What exactly do you do? I would imagine it would be something like mixing a saturated solution of CaCl2 in EtOH and either approximating conversion using layer size, or perhaps being a bit more precise and using the layer size of ether and its density to deduce ether weight per weight of sample.

MrDoctor - 8-9-2024 at 23:16

Quote: Originally posted by jackchem2001  

Your calcium chloride testing method sounds good. What exactly do you do? I would imagine it would be something like mixing a saturated solution of CaCl2 in EtOH and either approximating conversion using layer size, or perhaps being a bit more precise and using the layer size of ether and its density to deduce ether weight per weight of sample.


give that this was for tuning the process, i only needed aproximate, but relatively consistent results.
So i made a 50% solution of calcium chloride but in water. in ethanol i think it might be too miscible with the ether still. ether is not difficult try dry most of the way. its the final 0.5% or so that gets tricky, and for my purposes i didnt need to concern myself with that. i just took 10ml of brine, 10ml of distillate, and shook together in a 20ml cylinder to observe the change in volume of the layers.

i was seeing dramatic influences on the yield based on what i was doing, which is what i wanted.

i think the reason 50% is used is a higher concentration might boil the ether from the heat produced, at these volume ratios, and this is the lowest conc that still works for real time testing.

Something interesting to note btw. While i cant say for sure about hydrogen and CO, ethylene is soluble in ether or ethanol. when i did this to test the concentration of the output of my alumina reactor, since i was not properly controlling temperature well, the distillate would bubble quite a bit as it dried, releasing ethylene. It was a cool little indicator of if overshoot had been occuring. my reactor was excessively large since i followed something resembling hyperspacepirates ethylene converter, and could only monitor the output temp in a simple fashion. turns out it was a huge waste of time since ethanol to ether cant convert more than 10-20% regardless of catalyst size.

[Edited on 9-9-2024 by MrDoctor]

[Edited on 10-9-2024 by MrDoctor]

jackchem2001 - 20-9-2024 at 22:39

I think I may have found a way to improve the typical lab scale ether preparation. Usually, liquid ethanol is dropped onto hot sulfuric acid. Provided the sulfuric acid is sufficiently concentrated, the boiling point of the mixture is elevated and the reaction can take place. However, I think a lot of the ethanol flash boils over as it does not mix fast enough, so I decided to bubble the ethanol directly into the acid as a gas. A gas is both less dense and able to be bubbled in continuously rather than added dropwise, hence minimizing the potential for flash boiling.

Check and bleed valves were used in anticipation of suck back but none occurred. If I ever have to make ether again I will definitely reuse this procedure as reaching a steady state and managing temperature is easier.





First, 250mL of sulfuric acid was added to the reaction vessel (3). The reaction vessel was then brought to 120 degrees (measured using a thermometer well with vasaline inside). Heat was then applied to the ethanol boiler (but heat continued to be applied to the reaction vessel). The ethanol gas line must be very well insulated (extra foil on top of the extra silicone tubing is not shown), and there must be ample pressure release on the ethanol boiler (in case the line clogs) and on the reaction vessel (evolution of ethylene becomes very significant above 150 degrees). Both pressure releases separately went off as I was learning to use the apparatus, but no more after that.

The temperature is best kept between 130-145 degrees, with lower being better. During the initial warmup there will be bubbles in the gas exhaust (7). However, if the reaction temperature is kept between 130-145 bubbling will become very slow. Distillate is still taken off very quickly (>3 drops per second) as the bubbling reflects non-condensable gases (ethylene). Processing 3L of ethanol per day would be tedious but very reasonable. I did 1.5L over a few hours across 3 days since I don't like the ether smell.

No ether is distilled until a fair amount of ethanol is added (perhaps 100-200mL liquid), so it would probably be best to add this with the initial 250mL sulfuric acid. The ether collected initially is very pure (the head temperature is below 40 degrees). However, there comes a point where the reaction mixture begins to foam over. At this point the sulfuric acid has become too dilute. The ethanol feed must be slowed and the fractionating column must be insulated so water can be removed (head temperature ~60-80 degrees). This stops the foaming but the ether collected from this point is much less pure.

The purity of the product was tested using 2.5mL of 3g CaCl2 in 10mL water solution (thanks MrDoctor and Diachrynic). I collected three fractions:
- 400mL quite pure ether (assume 100%).
- 700mL 60% ether (I think the column was insulated about half way through this run).
- 330mL 40% ether (column insulated the entire time).

Overall, this should give 70-75% yield based on the theoretical 1270mL ether. I will make another post once I distill it all to confirm. The first fraction can probably be used as is for a lot of reactions/extractions.

Once last thing, the reaction vessel tars up pretty much immediately and it becomes impossible to see. However, the ethanol gas feed makes a lot of noise when it is bubbling into solution. This was initially concerning, but provided there is little to no bubbling in the exhaust gas there is no danger of an over pressure. The foaming does not represent an over pressure risk but is still a problem as it means ethanol is not being absorbed into the acid.

[Edited on 22-9-2024 by jackchem2001]

MrDoctor - 21-9-2024 at 03:50

very elaborate, and nice, although i cant help but wonder if you couldnt at this point just totally substitute the acid for alumina in that flask haha.

I saw improved efficiency when i was squirting ethanol well under the acid using a needle-type glass pipette, due to the extended contact time, although this does get me to thinking, the normal reaction for which the standards of how much ether x amount of acid can produce, is essentially based on ethanol dripping into and boiling on the surface of the sulfuric acid where it possibly draws out and vaporizes ethyl sulfate, through solvent-extraction. when it boils, this might be what carries ethyl sulfate so hard.

With a properly water controlled reaction, it would be interesting to see just how far this can go with a given amount of acid. I have a feeling that with the ethanol constantly in the gas-phase, aside from what refluxes, it shouldnt have the opportunity to steam distill the ethyl sulfate quite so much. But i base this on absolutely nothing but gut feeling from watching my own reaction and, how tweaking it changed things.

Fery - 21-9-2024 at 14:21

Great finding! Ethanol could be also added to the bottom of the reaction flask by long stem dropping funnel. It will very likely completely boil from liquid into gas in the glass tube much earlier than leaving the tube when reaching the bottom of the reaction flask (b.p. ethanol 78 C, T of the mixture in the reaction flask 140 C). Also a separating funnel with long stem could be assembled into a stopper with a hole or into thermometer adapter. Or long glass tube assembled into stopper / thermometer adapter and connect a separatory funnel to the glass tube with short piece of plastic tubing (glass tube so long that the plastic tubing is in outside of the reaction flask so it does not melt at 140 C inside). Now to invent how to return back the unreacted ethanol from fractionating column (to the bottom of the reaction flask) and the setup will be complete.

ether_apparatus.png - 6kB

jackchem2001 - 21-9-2024 at 19:42

I realized my original post doesn't make this very clear but I am bubbling the ethanol into the mixture using a glass stem below the joint (as in your picture Fery but just as a gas).

I would keep going to find the limit of ether production but I am sick of my bedroom smelling like ether. The idea of using a very thin end stem below the acid surface with liquid ethanol is interesting. It probably has the same effect as bubbling the ethanol as a gas (reduces flash boiling).

I imagine if you wanted to use alumina as a catalyst you would probably need a different apparatus as the one I used doesn't superheat the ethanol vapor.

MrDoctor - 23-9-2024 at 00:42

I did the math, even if you bubble the alumina catalyst tube vapor directly into the ethanol reflux vessel and got 100% absorbtion of the heat, it would only boil maybe, 20% or so as much ethanol as what originally comprised the liquid that became that vapor.

Also other downside is, for whatever reason, possibly dilution, only 10% or so ether can form in a single pass through alumina. higher % is possible with fancy dopants but also, must be alongside ethylene, which is not great if you dont need ethylene and like me, you need to pre-process your ethanol quite a bit due to the denaturants so wasting 2/3rds in exchange for quicker returns, doesnt quite math out.

Another thing to note is, much like the delightful past time of dumping cola into the deep fryer to make chicken-coke-nuggets, adding liquid too deep has ill effects here too. heat creeps up the pipette and boils the ethanol, its constantly ejecting drops of ethanol then sucking up acid from the vacuum that formed, and a little reciprocation occurs. as a result, you cant put the stem in too low, at least, not unless you can keep the bulk of the ethanol well away from where it can be boiled. otherwise the bubbling and knocking gets pretty bad. I only added it maybe mid-way at most.


Recently i realized i might want to start collecting ethyl sulfate for another reaction, and it doesnt look like theres any reasonable way to dry and de-tar the leftover mixture even if all the sulfate is recovered, however, now its a useful side product i almost considered making directly anyway. So, its suddenly more economical to flesh out and automate this reaction more.
One immediate change that can be made is using a fresh new longer unbroken pipette, and bending the stem so much more is under the acid, for possibly a nicer flash boil, but, also ill keep the area the bulk of the ethanol is, much further away so that none of that dangerous sputtering occurs.

I also feel compelled to see what will happen if i load the flask up with inert glass/ceramics, so ill try refluxing some of the nasty older batch leftovers with some fresh alcohol. if they dont amplify foaming or bumping, i feel like it might be a good way to eliminate water from the liquid, as well as keeping ethanol under the acid for longer. it will probably need to sit above the fluid level so evaporation can occur as well, so filling with that much perlite is probably a no go. pummice in large chunks might do the job though.


Lastly, if you add a dean stark trap, the hydrostatic pressure from the height of the condensed fluid, will resist any back pressure from a boiling chamber. as long as the fluid height is significantly greater than the depth of the fluid vapor ultimately gets pushed through, plus the stopcock also adds a huge amount of resistance meaning a disproportionate amount of pressure is required. This means you can either, link the output from that dean stark to the feed line so all condensed ethanol goes under the acid (imo probs not a smart idea, great for alumina method tho), or, you send it to your boiling chamber/flask where it can be boiled out. This is how i plan on supplying ethanol to my alumina reactor, since it lets me avoid using a pump (ether is not compatible with most kinds of low volume pumps), but, suckback isnt a concern there. in this however, it might be.


[Edited on 23-9-2024 by MrDoctor]

jackchem2001 - 25-9-2024 at 19:56

The ethylene byproduct and low conversion per pass with alumina is a bit unfortunate. Having multiple passes with a dean stark trap like you say would definitely help.

There is a thread in Prepublications by Magpie on diethyl sulfate preparation (https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=78...). It seems there is difficulty in distilling the material as it is high boiling but also a bit heat sensitive. I'm not sure how practical it would be to extract from the left over ether reaction mixture.

Some inert materials in the reaction flask might help with flash boiling (better mixing due to baffles). I think flash boiling and foaming would get worse with a recycle stream as ether has no affinity for sulfuric acid (foaming is observed when ethanol is bubbled into too dilute an acid - I think ether would behave like this). If I ever repeat this procedure I would take the product stream and add it to the ethanol boiler to see what would happen anyways.

[Edited on 26-9-2024 by jackchem2001]

MrDoctor - 29-9-2024 at 01:26

Oh i meant just, ethyl sulfate, not diethyl sulfate. I need to read up more but as far as i can tell, you can just neutralize it with calcium to form the easily seperated calcium salt. Whats not clear is if it rapidly hydrolyzes in those conditions or something.

As for foaming, did you observe it before any tar had formed? i wouldnt think that bubbling ether through the acid should be an issue anyway.
from what i observed, foaming is just a problem when tar thickens then solution, but also, the water forms as extremely small bubbles, being more readily caught and forming bubbles/foam as a result.

without either water, or tar, no foaming should occur.
Ive seen this in a patent for producing ethoxide without an alkali metal, but if you load a dean stark with a compatible dessicant, you can control water formation. i just needs to be able to absorb water at those temps at the rate of formation. i think silica gel might work, given some ethyl sulfate will condense over, making activated alumina or 3A unsuitable, without an acid-filter at least.

When using the alumina reactor, i noticed a lot of fog was produced when the temp spiked, which i suspect was water forming as it would steam up the glass and coat it with droplets rather than form a nice clean solvent-film, i believe its possible to extract water from the ethanol stream by turning the temperature down, and cycling ethanol through a few times, then cranking the heat up and collecting the new distillate seperately, as alumina can remove water from the vapor stream, i think.

jackchem2001 - 29-9-2024 at 22:26

Surprisingly methyl bisulfate salts (salts of methyl hydrogen sulfate) are used as counterions in drugs (I guess they are only efficacious as alkylating agents under very acidic conditions so it's safe). Perhaps there may be more information on preparing it. That is the only comment I can add about alkyl sulfates.

I observed tar formation pretty much immediately after bubbling ethanol into the hot acid. Foaming occurred much later on because I had a fractionating column and wasn't removing water. Once insulated and allowing the head temperature to rise, foaming stopped.

My best guess for the fog is this: https://youtu.be/gyND4M2WrlI?t=360 The fog is condensable as I observed it even when there was little to no bubbling in the exhaust bubbler (which comes from non-condensable gases so ethylene in this synthesis). I also didn't see any fog past the graham condensor.

[Edited on 30-9-2024 by jackchem2001]