chilled_fluorine

On someone's blog about h2o2 that I found randomly (sounds stupid, right? I did find it interesting though), I read that you can make exceptionally strong h2o2 with sodium percarbonate. Does anyone know how I could do this, and get a 30-40% concentration? Dilution is allowed, but I don't like the idea of messing with test grade+ HP more than I have to... Anything above 40 just frightens me, it's nasty stuff. Apparently the other product is sodium carbonate, could I remove that with a coffee filter, or would it (the sodium carbonate) dissolve in the solution? Please try to stay on topic, not that you wouldn't. This is meant to be a practical exercise, cost effectiveness is the overriding concern.

Would someone mind going to this

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=17770Page and telling me what it is about? I can't view it on my browser

Check with local farmer's co-ops, local companies that buy bulk liquids, or your county extension agency. People who live outside of normal municipal trash pick-up may be able to point you in the right direction, as the steel drums are frequently used for burn barrels.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, that got me nowhere. Any other ideas?

Go to the section you want first, then click Start a New Topic.

 

 

As I said, Gilded was simply sick of everything in his part of the world being made from pine. It's simply his opinion. Or maybe "table" just fit with his rhyming scheme better than "chair" or "furniture".

I thought you were trying to say something completely different. Who is gilded? I wasn't talking about the poem really, and I have heard other people talking about pine tables to. Oddly enough, it is always pine tables, and they don't phrase their posts as poems.

To me, the main problems with hydrogen powered cars are where to get the hydrogen and how to store it on the car. Solar power would work for getting the energy, but how do we store it in reasonable amounts? I was thinking the fuel tank could contain a block of lithium, and water could be stored elsewhere. The lithium and water could be used to make hydrogen, which could in turn be combusted the usual way. Lithium hydroxide would be produced as a useful byproduct, it could be sold to the battery industry, or back to the "lithium station" for a discount on your next purchase. The lithium station could take the hydroxide to an electrolysis plant, where the lithium would be regenerated with renewable energy, as well as some hydrogen and oxygen, which could be combusted to contribute to lithium production. The obvious challenges are where we would get all that lithium ore, and all that renewable energy. Sodium could potentially replace the lithium due to its much greater abundance on earth, but it is much more dangerous, and I think it has lower energy density. Has someone already thought of this? I would guess so, but maybe not. Lithium would also be readily available... Yay!

The acid is so this thread can be in the Chemistry section.

 

If you're out my way, Moon, bring along some pine with you. If you want to make it into 1x4s and 1x6s for easy travel, that's OK by me. Just make 'em straight, and no acid.

The reason isn't the acid, it's just I don't know how to pick which section I post in.:facepalms:We have LOTs of pine in my part of the USA. It really is such a lovely wood. It's just so hard to cut, without getting sap on everything...It's all pine TABLEs I hear about. Doesn't anyone know why people would want to destroy such a great choice of table?

DIY from ammonium nitrate? That's my plan if I ever actually need some nitric.

Funnily enough, I have never actually seen a terrorist on here. Either there are none, or they're hiding very well... *shifty eyes*

Distilling hot, oxidizing acids is not my thing, and I don't like salts dissolved in my nitric. Oddly enough, it's easier to get nitric acid here than it is to get ammonium nitrate, just in low concentrations... Maybe I could find a few cold packs, but I don't think ours use AN. I have found it is cheaper and easier just to buy the stuff, who cares if the Feds start watching me, I don't do anything bad with it. :shifty eyes:

Pictures, please? Pretty please? With a cesium on top? XP

Wow, really? With a caesium on top? Even if I wanted to, I couldn't, and the only pics I got were of the glowing slag, it wouldn't satisfy your pyromania one bit.

Did I ever tell you guys about the guy from science madness who was melting HMTD in a glass test tube over a blowtorch with no safety equipment? Did I show you the pictures, and tell you WHERE he found out you could melt HMTD? Fine, don't delete it.

This is an example of making charcoal in a large drum. Simply downsize for the container you are using.

 

 

http://www.eagleques.../~bbq/charcoal/

I'm still trying to find one of those big oil drums... It didn't work when I tried to scale it down a few months ago. I'm going to try going full scale, now that I have more than enough wood.

I've been playing with a modification of the basic TLUD, called TLOD (top-lit opposite draft) tech.

 

If you create a "sealed" vortex above the can of burning fuel, you can reduce ash production and improve your yield of char up to four times. This is an active process, requiring a little extra power to generate an active, directed, airflow.

===

 

The can of fuel (the active can) is open on top, and it needs 5-6 small holes punched into the sides--just above the bottom. A kitchen-style can punch/bottle opener, with just the sharp tip punched through the can's side, often works well for both distance and size.

 

Place this (active) can inside of a larger diameter can (so there are a few inches or so between the outside of the inner (active) can and the inside of the larger can. The larger (outer) can needs a lid, with a hole in the center, for heat/flame to rise out of. The hole in the center of this lid should be about 1/3 to 1/2 of the diameter of the inner can.

 

The distance between the top of the inner can, and the lid of the outer can, should be at least a few inches--less than or similar to the airspace between the can's radii--to allow an effective vortex to form easily. Given a good vortex, the farther the lid is from the top of the inner can, the less efficiently will the smoke be sealed within and below the vortex; so this, and the size of the exit hole, can be adjusted to improve the shape of the vortex and thus efficiency of the burn.

 

A battery operated (solar rechargeable) pump (normally used to inflate air mattresses) produces enough airflow to create a vortex for a coffee can / 5 gal. metal bucket system. At least it worked for me this past Spring.

 

Feed the airflow into the side (near the bottom) of the outer can, pointed around the perimeter of the can (not straight toward the center, but radially around the inside of the can). The air pumped in circulates around the outside of the inner can, and thus pulls some air out through the small punched holes (Venturi effect), carrying it up to the top where it continues circling and being pushed toward the center hole in the lid... to exit. This creates a vortex (tornado) which dips into the inner can (where a small fire has been started with kindling on top of the main fuel).

 

The vortex becomes filled with smoke (sucked out through small holes near bottom of inner can by Venturi force). The vortex ignites and continues to heat the fuel below--after the kindling is burned. The heated fuel produces smoke, which feeds the burning vortex, which continues heating the fuel. Smoke pulled down through the fuel improves the char yield, as carbon-rich smoke fractionates and some carbon redeposits onto the fuel.

 

A burning tornado is fun to watch, but when smoke production ceases (enough to keep the vortex burning), then the fuel has been converted to charcoal. Turn off the airflow and continue cooking with perfect, rapidly produced, hot coals--or dump the char into water or mud to quench the process. Hot char will soak up, and retain, lots of water (or compost tea) to create a great onsite soil amendment (biochar). Suffocating the char will keep it dry and easy to process and transport when cooled.

===

 

Balancing the depth of the vortex (airflow speed/volume), with the little holes in the lower side of the inner can, is the hard part. The vortex need to broadly dip into the inner can (to create an "air curtain" and low oxygen conditions below the vortex), but not so far that it dips deeply into the fuel. Enlarging the small holes will shrink the vortex depth for a given airflow configuration; so start with very small holes.

 

[A hair dryer (or blowdryer) will work with two 5 gal. buckets (one as a stand, below the other active bucket), inside of a trash can.] Did this over the past summer.

 

[A leaf blower should work with a 50 gal. oil drum, inside of a sheet-metal "air guide" or other, larger drum with lid.] Haven't done this yet.

 

Check out woodgasCampstove dotcom, or woodgas campstoves in general, for examples and pictures of this basic "active airflow principle" applied to improved charcoal production. Most sites have errors about the airflow, but a few sites show the correct diagrams for the airflow related to the inner (active) can.

===

 

It's a way of burning the smoke separately, instead of burning the fuel directly, to turn waste biomass--even sewage and plastics--into char. Smoke-free burning, which produces reduced carbon; what a deal!

 

~

Wow, that was really long! There were a few things I was unsure of while reading it. Through what opening does the blower blow? Could you try to give some more specific measurements? Maybe a diagram or two? Great post! For some reason this seems familiar to me.

I have some sulphuric acid, supposedly 98%, that I bought as drain cleaner. Anyways, it is really muddy brown / black in color, and I think it might have an inhibitor of some sort to reduce its corrosiveness. How would I go about filtering the acid? I was thinking of using some sort of sand filter, but I can't think of a way to contain the sand and allow the acid to go through. Would anyone here with some pure, technical grade acid mind using a pipette to put a single drop on a piece of standard printer and timing how long it takes to start charring? Tell me the results of course. It will help me decide if it has any inhibitor, if it does, I'll just throw the stuff away.

On someone's blog about h2o2 that I found randomly (sounds stupid, right? I did find it interesting though), I read that you can make exceptionally strong h2o2 with sodium percarbonate. Does anyone know how I could do this, and get a 30-40% concentration? Dilution is allowed, but I don't like the idea of messing with test grade+ HP more than I have to... Anything above 40 just frightens me, it's nasty stuff. Apparently the other product is sodium carbonate, could I remove that with a coffee filter, or would it (the sodium carbonate) dissolve in the solution? Please try to stay on topic, not that you wouldn't. This is meant to be a practical exercise, cost effectiveness is the overriding concern.

We don't generally delete posts in threads unless they are obscene, irrelevant or spammy. I do have to question why you would want it?

 

Also,

 

 

 

Yes, but I'm wondering if you do based on this:

 

 

 

John beat me to the solvation issue. Asides from the intrinsic reactive properties of the compound, I would think that you also wouldn't have hydrogen bonding, which is where water gets a bulk of its solvation properties from. This would depend on whether it exists as NH_4⁺/ F^- or NH₃ / HF in its molten state (I actually don't know which is the case; perhaps John might). Regardless, a mixture of ammonia and HF would of course be nothing like water as a solvent either.

When I said "becomes a gas" I meant that the matter itself becomes a gas, not the NH4F in a gaseous state, that just sounds silly. Is it even possible for it to exist as a gas? I wouldn't think so, although i would love to be told otherwise. Sort of akin to candle wax becoming a gas when you burn it in air. Admittedly, that was a very ambiguous thing to say.

I would like it if you would remove this post (this is an edit, I think I meant this whole thread, we haven't said anything of real use, no offense, just provided potentially dangerous information) so none of those anarchy cookbook fools googles triiodide, comes here, blows themselves up trying what John implied was possible, and completely ruins my reputation, as well as damage that of this site. As far as the anarchist fools go, thats just another one of natural selection's plots to better our gene pool. Triiodide is one of those trigger words that seems to attract every idiot in the country.

"I heard that in its molten state, it makes a good solvent for halogens "

I don't know whom you heard that from, but I think you should stop listening to them

http://en.wikipedia....gen_trichloride

http://en.wikipedia....rogen_triiodide

\Are quite likely products from the reaction.

Wow, I really need to get a new source! And they say they are reliable...Hypervalent iodine, after someone says how to make this stuff, could you please delete this post? Don't want anyone getting hurt, and I don't know how.

You of course know the difference between sublimation and vaporization?

 

Additionally, ammonium fluoride is not NH₃F. The ammonium ion is NH₄⁺ (ammonia is NH₃), making the neutral salt of ammonium fluoride NH₄F.

 

I'm really not seeing many similarities with water.

• It's a salt, water isn't.
• Melting point of ammonium fluoride is reported to be anything from 100^oC to 160^oC, though it tends to decompose before it melts (water is stable into the thousands of ^oC).
• Not very soluble in alcohols and not soluble at all in ammonia; water is.
• When it sublimes, it exists as HF and NH₃, where as water just remains as water.

etc.

 

I did notice that they had similar crystal structures and that their bond distances were similar; outside of that, the chemical and physical properties are quite different. As a solvent it would not be useful, especially since it decomposes around or before its melting temperature. From what I've read, it's used for oil well acidification or turned into a more acidic relative (ammonium bifluoride) for glass etching.

I heard that in its molten state, it makes a good solvent for halogens and other elements. Is that not true? The similarity i was thinking of was its solvent properties. I did notice the bond distance as well. Wow, the classic undergrad's mistake of forgetting the extra H in the cation. :facepalms:You of course know the difference between sublimation and decomposition?

Ammonium fluoride is similar to water?

 

http://en.wikipedia....monium_fluoride

 

 

 

It sublimes at 100c exactly how is it similar to water?

Well, I heard it is the only substance that can form a crystal structure with water, and that it has exceptional solvent properties in its liquid state. And it can become a gas at 100c, like water. Sounds similar enough to me.

With that design, it seems to me that once you put any kind of load on it, the steam (or hot gases) would tend to just escape around the upturned can rather than pressurize the can and flow out the nozzles. In essence, what you are creating is a rotating chimney flue with far too much constriction and a massive amount of leakage right around the source.

 

I don't know where you live chilled or the quality of the wood, but if you're looking for an economically beneficial way of disposing of the wood, I'd consider the following after judging the local marketplace:

1) Firewood

2) Processed products like lump char, dimensional lumber, feedstock for woodcrafts, etc.

3) Direct use of heat from combustion using a rocket stove mass heater, outdoor oven, or similar device.

 

Do you have a garden?

 

If you're in it for the joy of tinkering rather than for economical reasons, then it's a completely different matter.

JM, thank you. Right now I would guesstimate I have 4000 kg of nice, dense oak wood stockpiled in my backyard. Although people often think I am from the uk because I am "too eloquent to be one of those dumb Americans", I do in fact live in the USA, and I really don't think I'm all that eloquent. Anyways, I do have a garden, it is the pride of my neighbourhood, but how is that at all relevant? If I wanted to tinker, I am sure there would be better things to do with my time. I am trying to live a more symbiotic life, and to leave as small a footprint as possible. Sounds futile, I know, and that's because it is. But it makes me feel better about humanities hopeless situation. Just remember, my desired product is electricity. I want electricity, with as little effort as possible, and in reasonably large quantities, and for free. This must sound very demanding, but I am providing chemical energy, so why not? Seems like my best option is selling it as firewood.

Suppose I had a lot of limestone... Does anyone know how I would go about removing barium or strontium compounds from it? There should be some strontium and barium carbonate impurities in it, right?

I was thinking about ammonium fluoride recently, it's similarities to water. Anybody want to post some rumblings about it? What temperature does it decompose at, if it does? Could it exist as a liquid at atmospheric pressure? Would it make a good solvent for anything? How could I make it? Could I make it from ammonium chloride and something with fluorine? Any info appreciated, thanks!

Molten rocket fuel... 'Nuff said.

The challenge is: I have a coffe can and some pieces of wood, now how do I make charcoal with them?I really hate the method of heating the can in an external fire, the wood should be it's own fuel for pyrolysis. Please help?

I'm going to start out by saying that if you are a terrorist, you probably already know where to get it, and if you don't, a little effort should yield many ideas. Also, terrorists, I agree it was wrong to steal your land, but it wasn't me who did it, it was the American government. It probably won't stop you, but don't kill people who have done nothing to you in their lifetime... Would Allah really want that? Anyways, I'm going to see how many links I can get on this page. Mods THIS IS NOT FOR BOMB MAKING!!! I just want to make some copper nitrate, and test some silver, mkay? Anyways, if you know where to get it, post your link here! I'll start out with mine, it's pretty overpriced, but it's a start...

http://unitednuclear...ucts_id=171Copy paste that into your browser.

I've heard ruthenium is great for heat retention... But it might be a little too cheap for your purpose... LOLRemember, after whatever you use is as hot as it will get, it essentially becomes a heat sink, wasting your fuel. I would reccomend you put it in later on in the burn. Porous things (aerogel) tend to be good for extended heat retention, more dense ones (osmium) for capacity of heat per volume. The trick is to find a balance between the two. Iron powder could work, but it can be flammable. Lead powder would probably be too toxic. I would reccomend a very course iron or copper powder, but plain quartzite sand would probably be the best in my opinion.

What's up with you guys and pine tables? It seems like everyone is talking about burning them, pouring permanganic acid, piraña bath, sulphuric acid over them... Would anyone care to explain?Someone's signature here read something like: I'm going to paint the table, I'm going to paint it fine, I'm going to use h2so4, because the wood is pine.

To be fair, John Cuthber, people don't expect their own quotes to be tampered with in a reply. To insist that chilled_flourine should pay more attention in this instance is like telling someone you've hidden something in the room they're in, and then chastising them when they fail to check their own pockets.

Thank you phi, for the first bit of support I have been given in my short time here.

OK, so I think that you are not paying a lot of attention to what you do and therefore shouldn't be playing with thermite.

Your response is to point out that you don't know what you wrote and didn't realise you should check.

" I thought I italicized that myself,"

John, "I thought I italicized that myself" was not my justification. The safety precautions I named are. Keep in mind that I was only using a puny 6 gram pile, not exactly the mother of all bombs. If I was truly as ignorant as you think I am, nothing you could say would influence my decisions, therefore you should have given up already. Are you beginning to doubt even yourself? John, if I call a beer a giddleboop, and you call it a beer, but the bartender gives us both beers, does it really matter what we call them if we just want a beer? I would say no. I admit it, I made a mistake. My chemistry teacher was wrong, and since I said what she did, that makes me equally wrong. No, I'm not trying to take the blame away from myself. I could have found out for sure. I just presumed a chem teacher was a valid source, and in this case I was wrong. Either way, I made calcium, which was the purpose of all this. I succeeded (got my metaphorical beer (no, I am not an alcoholic)), debate that.

Wow, I just rated myself 1 star while trying to post a new topic. I'm such a noob.

This is sort of random, but do you think the Feds would let us try this with the statue of liberty? LOL