05-29-02 18:40
No 315636
What's up?! My filthy cock-sucking internet provider was down for several hours, and it's great to be back online! Alright, lets say that you have a vessel with all the Wacker chems in it, which is under a bit of pressure with oxygen, but you don't want to make your arms soar by shaking the hell out of it, so you decide to use an electric stirrer. In order to keep the vessel under pressure, the stirrer must be enclosed within the same area as the vessel. Sure, I could try some bull-shit like keeping the engine outside the vessel and putting tight rubber gaskets around the stirring rod, so air won't escape, but that's unrealistic, because the stirring rod's home-made, so it's a little off-center. Anyway, if the engine's enclosed within a vessel of pure oxygen, would the oxygen ignite and blow my face off?
If that's the case, then here's another idea: Leave the vessel open with the engine stirring away, and have several tubes near the bottom of the solution bubbling in pure oxygen at a rapid rate. Would that insure intimate contact of oxygen with the solution?
Love my country, fear my government.
(One Man Show)
05-29-02 19:04
No 315646
I like that second idea better. Can you have one tube spiral tightly inward around the bottom, with pin holes like 1/2 cm apart?
"Have we descended to the level of dumb beasts?" Fear & Loathing
Be loved and blessed hp and cg!!
(Distinctive Doe)
05-29-02 19:26
No 315651
Anyway, if the engine's enclosed within a vessel of pure oxygen, would the oxygen ignite and blow my face off?
Most likely!
Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety
(Stoni's sexual toy)
05-29-02 19:28
No 315652
The first idea is an exceptionally bad one! Yes, doing it that way will without a doubt blow up!
O2 absorption without pressure is too low. You will be wasting LOTS of O2 by bubbling without pressure.
I'm not fat just horizontally disproportionate.
(Hive Bee)
05-29-02 20:34
No 315678
How about the 12volt dc submersible fuel pump motors used in automobiles ?
My car hasn't blown up.
Not yet, anyway.
(Hive Bee)
05-29-02 21:25
No 315701
K, this is not a source cuz it's not a chem or controlled watched shit, etc., plus you need licenses and all sorts of shit to buy from this company, but Ace Glass came out with a Super Magnet stirrer for its line of pilot plant reactors and pressure vessels. it actually looks like an overhead stirrer but it's got a huge magnet on it. the catalogue says it's so strong that it will spin a magnet on the vessel's wall. it's a little less than a grand. you could probably make your own from an overhead stirrer or something. that would be the best swim thinks. or one of those strong mag stirrers that can stir over 100 L, but they cost like 4000. laaaaate
(Title on BackOrder)
05-29-02 23:18
No 315738
Why not modify an air tool, like a die grinder, to be used for overhead stirring. You could modify this tool to run off of an oxygen tank. I've seen kits made to modify air tools to run off of CO2 tanks for use on off-road trail repairs. You could probably modify a fan that used the air pressure to make it stir, while at the same time it would add oxygen to your system.
I think you'd be a lot better off just buying some good megnetic stirrers and going that route.
(PVC-Analog Taste-Tester)
05-30-02 05:41
No 315847
"Why not just make or get a bad ass magnetic stirrer and use magnetic stirring?"
Yeah, you're right; I could swing paying for a nice one in about a month or so. If I can't get the water in a test run to stir violently, then I'll fasten a small glass fin to the stir bar with epoxy.. I'll have to buy like 5 stir bars, because they seem like an easily lost item. But still, I'll still experiment with taping dildos to the reaction vessel, and use a weak ultrasonic buzz. Would a tire guage be too crude of an instrument to check the pressure of the reaction vessel? Thanks for confirming my suspicion that an enclosed engine in O2 will scorch my face! Peace!
Love my country, fear my government.
(Hive Bee)
05-30-02 10:43
No 315882
ok ok not really stirring but what about using either ultrasound or vibrating(fast) the container to cause the liquid inside to splosh about.
Has anyone looked into using cavitation in other reactions.
see below
The chemical effects of ultrasound are diverse and include dramatic improvements in both stoichiometric and catalytic reactions. In some cases, ultrasonic irradiation can increase reactivities by nearly a million-fold. It does so through the process of acoustic cavitation; the formation, growth and implosive collapse of bubbles in a liquid.
During cavitational collapse, intense heating of the bubbles occurs. The localized hot spots have temperatures in the range of 5000°C, pressures approaching 500 atmospheres, lifetimes of a few microseconds, and heating and cooling rates greater than 109 K/s.
just a thought , but maybe i'm talking outta my ass again
I love the smell of Ketone in the morning.
(Title on BackOrder)
05-30-02 18:42
No 315968
you ever looked into unltrasound lab equipment? it's expensive as shit. If you were to set up a 500ml reaction vessel for ultrasound, you could expect to spend around $7000 to get it operational. Those ultrasound tips and heavy duty conical flasks with threaded joints aren't cheap, not to mention the 1000W variable base that produces the vibrations.
(Stoni's sexual toy)
05-31-02 00:07
No 316066
Ultrasound will drive out all the gasses from your solvent. That's exactly what you don't want to happen.
I'm not fat just horizontally disproportionate.