CLICK HERE FOR FREE BLOGGER TEMPLATES, LINK BUTTONS AND MORE! »

Friday, 16 December 2011

electroplating process...

what is electroplating process??
Electroplating is the application of electrolytic cells which a thin layer of metal is deposited onto an electrically conductive surface.

why electroplating is done?
there are several reasons why we want to coat a conductive surface with a metal. silver plating and gold plating of jewelry or silver ware typically done to improve the appearance and value of the items. chromium plating improves the appearance of objects and also improves its wear. zinc or tin coating may be applied to confer corrosion resistance. sometimes, electroplating is done simply to increases the thickness of an item.

how electroplating works??
electroplating works like galvanic cells in reverse. an electrical current reduces cations from a solution so that they can coat a conductive material with a thin layer.

A closer look at electroplating.
In one form of electroplating, the metal to be plated is located at the anode of the circuit, with the item to be plated located at the cathode. both the anode and the cathode are immersed in a solution which contains a dissolved metal salts and other ions which act to permit the flow of electricity through the circuit. direct current is applied to the anode, oxidizing its metal atoms and dissolving them in the electrolyte solution.the dissolved  metal ions are reduced at the cathode, plating the metal onto the item. the current through the circuit is such that the rate at which the anode is dissolved is equal to the rate at which the cathode is plated.

here are some link that showed some animation of electroplating process. do not hesitate to click to the link ok.. (^_^)

Friday, 25 November 2011

Re-crystallization Techniques...

The most common method of purifying solid organic compounds is by recrystallization. In this technique, an impure solid compound is dissolved in a solvent and then allowed to slowly crystallize out as the solution cools. As the compound crystallizes from the solution, the molecules of the other compounds dissolved in solution are excluded from the growing crystal lattice, giving a pure solid.
Crystallization of a solid is not the same as precipitation of a solid. In crystallization, there is a slow, selective formation of the crystal framework resulting in a pure compound. In precipitation, there is a rapid formation of a solid from a solution that usually produces an amorphous solid containing many trapped impurities within the solid's crystal framework. For this reason, experimental procedures that produce a solid product by precipitation always include a final recrystallization step to give the pure compound.
The process of recrystallization relies on the property that for most compounds, as the temperature of a solvent increases, the solubility of the compound in that solvent also increases. For example, much more table sugar can be dissolved in very hot water (just below the boiling point) than in water at room temperature. What will happen if a concentrated solution of hot water and sugar is allowed to cool to room temperature? As the temperature of the solution decreases, the solubility of the sugar in the water also decreases, and the sugar molecules will begin to crystallize out of the solution. (This is how rock candy is made.) This is the basic process that goes on in the recrystallization of a solid.

The steps in the recrystallization of a compound are:

  1. Find a suitable solvent for the recrystallization;
  2. Dissolve the impure solid in a minimum volume of hot solvent;
  3. Remove any insoluble impurities by filtration;
  4. Slowly cool the hot solution to crystallize the desired compound from the solution;
  5. Filter the solution to isolate the purified solid compound.

Choosing a solvent

The first consideration in purifying a solid by recrystallization is to find a suitable solvent. There are four important properties that you should look for in a good solvent for recrystallization.
  1. The compound should be very soluble at the boiling point of the solvent and only sparingly soluble in the solvent at room temperature. This difference in solubility at hot versus cold temperatures is essential for the recrystallization process. If the compound is insoluble in the chosen solvent at high temperatures, then it will not dissolve. If the compound is very soluble in the solvent at room temperature, then getting the compound to crystallize in pure form from solution is difficult. For example, water is an excellent solvent for the recrystallization of benzoic acid. At 10°C only 2.1 g of benzoic acid dissolves in 1 liter of water, while at 95 °C the solubility is 68 g/L.
  2. The unwanted impurities should be either very soluble in the solvent at room temperature or insoluble in the hot solvent. This way, after the impure solid is dissolved in the hot solvent, any undissolved impurities can be removed by filtration. After the solution cools and the desired compound crystallizes out, any remaining soluble impurities will remain dissolved in the solvent.
  3. The solvent should not react with the compound being purified. The desired compound may be lost during recrystallization if the solvent reacts with the compound.
  4. The solvent should be volatile enough to be easily removed from the solvent after the compound has crystallized. This allows for easy and rapid drying of the solid compound after it has been isolated from the solution.
Finding a solvent with the desired properties is a search done by trial and error. First, test the solubility of tiny samples of the compound in test tubes with a variety of different solvents (water, ethanol, methanol, ethyl acetate, diethyl ether, hexane, toluene, etc.) at room temperature. If the compound dissolves in the solvent at room temperature, then that solvent is unsuitable for recrystallization. If the compound is insoluble in the solvent at room temperature, then the mixture is heated to the solvent's boiling point to determine if the solid will dissolve at high temperature, and then cooled to see whether it crystallizes from the solution at room temperature.

Dissolving the solid

Once a suitable solvent is selected, place the impure solid in an Erlenmeyer flask and add a small volume of hot solvent to the flask. Erlenmeyer flasks are preferred over beakers for recrystallization because the conical shape of an Erlenmeyer flask decreases the amount of solvent lost to evaporation during heating, prevents the formation of a crust around the sides of the glass, and makes it easier to swirl the hot solution while dissolving the solid without splashing it out of the flask.
Keep the solution in the Erlenmeyer flask warm on a hot plate or in a water bath, and add small volumes of hot solvent to the flask until all of the solid just dissolves. Swirl the solution between additions of solvent and break up any lumps with a stirring rod or spatula. Occasionally there will be impurities present in the solid that are insoluble in the chosen solvent even at high temperature. If subsequent additions of solvent to the solution do not seem to dissolve any of the remaining solid, stop adding solvent to the solution (as this will decrease the percent recovery of the desired compound) and filter or decant the hot solution to remove the insoluble impurities.

Using decolorizing carbon

Colored impurities are sometimes difficult to remove from solid mixtures. These colored impurities, often due to the presence of polar or polymeric compounds, can cause a colorless organic solid to have a tint of color even after recrystallization. Decolorizing or activated carbon is used to remove the colored impurities from the sample. Decolorizing carbon is very finely divided carbon that provides high surface area to adsorb the colored impurities.
Very little decolorizing carbon is needed to remove the colored impurities from a solution. You must be judicious in your use of decolorizing carbon: if too much is used, it can adsorb the desired compound from the solution as well as the colored impurities. After the impure solid sample is dissolved in hot solvent, a small amount of decolorizing carbon, about the size of a pea, is added to the hot solution. This must be done carefully to avoid a surge of boiling from the hot solution. The solution is stirred and heated for a few minutes and then filtered hot to remove the decolorizing carbon. The resulting filtrate should be colorless and the recrystallization process continues as before.

Crystallizing the solid

After the insoluble impurities have been removed, cover the flask containing the hot filtrate with a watch glass and set it aside undisturbed to cool slowly to room temperature. As the solution cools, the solubility of the dissolved compound will decrease and the solid will begin to crystallize from the solution. After the flask has cooled to room temperature, it may be placed in an ice bath to increase the yield of solid. Do not rapidly cool the hot solution by placing the flask in an ice bath before it has cooled to room temperature-this will result in a rapid precipitation of the solid in an impure form because of trapped impurities.
Sometimes the dissolved compound fails to crystallize from the solution on cooling. If this happens, crystallization can be induced by various methods. One way to induce crystallization is by scratching the inner wall of the Erlenmeyer flask with a glass stirring rod. This is believed to release very small particles of glass which act as nuclei for crystal growth. Another method of inducing crystallization is to add a small crystal of the desired compound, called a seed crystal, to the solution. Again, this seed crystal acts as a template on which the dissolved solid will begin crystallizing. If neither of these two techniques results in crystallization, the compound was probably dissolved in too much hot solvent. If you believe that you may have too much solvent for the amount of dissolved compound, reheat the solution to boiling, boil off or distill some of the solvent, and then allow the solution to cool to room temperature again to effect crystallization.

Isolating the solid by suction filtration

Once the compound has completely precipitated from the solution, it is separated from the remaining solution (also called the mother liquor) by filtration. Typically this is done by vacuum or suction filtration using a Büchner funnel. Line the bottom of the Büchner or Hirsch funnel with a piece of filter paper that is large enough to cover the holes in the bottom plate of the funnel without curling up on the sides of the funnel. Place a neoprene adapter on the stem of the funnel and insert it in the top of a filter flask (a thick-walled Erlenmeyer flask with a side-arm) that has been securely clamped to a ringstand.
Using a piece of thick-walled vacuum tubing, connect the side-arm of the filter flask to a water aspirator. Turn the water to the aspirator on full force to create a vacuum through the system. If necessary, carefully adjust the piece of filter paper so that it covers all of the holes in the funnel, and then dampen it with a small volume of cold solvent; this will create a better seal between the filter paper and the plate in the funnel, preventing any solid from getting under the filter paper and passing through the funnel. Slowly pour the recrystallization solution into the funnel and allow the suction to pull the mother liquor through. Rinse the Erlenmeyer flask with a small volume of cold recrystallization solvent to remove any remaining solid. Add this solvent to the funnel and then wash the solid in the funnel, called the filter cake or residue, with a few milliliters of fresh, cold recrystallization solvent to remove any remaining mother liquor and dissolved impurities.
Leave the aspirator on for a few minutes and allow air to pass through the crystals to dry them. After pulling air through the crystals for a brief time, remove the vacuum from the system by disconnecting the vacuum tubing from the aspirator before turning the water off. If you turn the aspirator water off first, water can be sucked into the filter flask and may contaminate the product. The filter cake is removed from the funnel by carefully prying it from the filter using a spatula. The cake of crystals will still be slightly wet with solvent and should be allowed to dry thoroughly before measuring the weight or melting point of the solid material.

gravity filtration

snowflakes..

Friday, 18 November 2011

nice experiment...do it at home!


check out the colour form! 

what is pH scale?

INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITION
Acidic and basic are two extremes that describe a chemical property chemicals. Mixing acids and bases can cancel out or neutralize their extreme effects. A substance that is neither acidic nor basic is neutral.
The pH scale measures how acidic or basic a substance is. The pH scale ranges from 0 to 14. A pH of 7 is neutral. A pH less than 7 is acidic. A pH greater than 7 is basic.
The pH scale is logarithmic and as a result, each whole pH value below 7 is ten times more acidic than the next higher value. For example, pH 4 is ten times more acidic than pH 5 and 100 times (10 times 10) more acidic than pH 6. The same holds true for pH values above 7, each of which is ten times more alkaline (another way to say basic) than the next lower whole value. For example, pH 10 is ten times more alkaline than pH 9 and 100 times (10 times 10) more alkaline than pH 8.
Pure water is neutral. But when chemicals are mixed with water, the mixture can become either acidic or basic. Examples of acidic substances are vinegar and lemon juice. Lye, milk of magnesia, and ammonia are examples of basic substances.

Ionization of Water:
Water molecules exist in equilibrium with hydrogen ions and hydroxide ions.
H2O <--> H+ + OH-
The water equilibrium constant is written as:
Kw = [H+] [OH-]

Experimentally, it has been found that the concentration of:
H+ = OH- = 10-7

Therefore: Kw = [10-7][ 10-7] = [10-14]
(To multiply exponential numbers - simply add the exponents.)

The values for Kw, H+, OH- concentration all indicate that the equilibrium favors the reactant (water molecules). In other words, only very small amounts of H+ and OH- ions are present.
Effect of Acids and Bases on Water Equilibrium:
If an acid (H+) is added to the water, the equilibrium shifts to the left and the OH- ion concentration decreases.
Water Equilibrium: H2O <--> H+ + OH-
If base ( OH-) is added to water, the equilibrium shifts to left and the H+ concentration decreases.
Water Equilibrium Principle: The multiplication product (addition of exponents) of H+ and OH- ion concentration must always be equal to 10-14.
BOTH H+ and OH- ions are ALWAYS PRESENT in any solution. A solution is acidic if the H+ are in excess. A solution is basic, if the OH- ions are in excess.n you

Here are some pictures that might concern you (^_^)

credit to mr google

know your pH food.

Saturday, 12 November 2011

beauty @ beast??

credit to mr google

oh my god! baby johnson lotion??!

confirmed??

eversoff to??

Sunday, 6 November 2011

ToP 100 Chemists..(wooooww!!)

Do you know that on February 10, 2011, Thomson Reuters (provider of information for the world's businesses and professionals) released data identifying the world’s top 100 chemists over the past 11 years as ranked by the impact of their published research.
The top 100 is intended to celebrate the achievements of chemists who achieved the highest citation impact scores for chemistry papers (articles and reviews) published since January 2000. Thomson Reuters published the table in support of the International Year of Chemistry.
Top 100 Chemists, 2000-2010, Ranked by Citation Impact
(among those with 50 or more papers)
RankInstitutionPapersCitationsImpact
1Charles M. LIEBER
Harvard University
7417,776240.22
2Omar M. YAGHI
University of California Los Angeles
9019,870220.78
3Michael O’KEEFFE
Arizona State University
7312,910176.85
4K. Barry SHARPLESS
Scripps Research Institute
609,754162.57
5A. Paul ALIVISATOS
University of California Berkeley
9314,589156.87
6Richard E. SMALLEY†
Formerly Rice University
609,217153.62
7Hongjie DAI
Stanford University
8812,768145.09
8Xiaogang PENG
University of Arkansas
598,548144.88
9Valery V. FOKIN
Scripps Research Institute
546,853126.91
10
[MS 1]
Peidong YANG
University of California Berkeley
9511,167117.55
11Benjamin LIST
Max Planck Institute for Coal Research
818,808108.74
12
[MS 50]
Mark E. THOMPSON
University of Southern California
535,394101.77
13Robert H HAUGE
Rice University
555,566101.20
14Eric N. JACOBSEN
Harvard University
817,98598.58
15Banglin CHEN
University of Texas San Antonio
615,92997.20
16David W.C. MACMILLAN
Princeton University
555,26795.76
17Mostafa EL-SAYED
Georgia Institute of Technology
11110,13591.31
18Ezio RIZZARDO
Commonwealth Scientific And Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Australia
524,74791.29
19Michael S. STRANO
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
544,84389.69
20Michael J. ZAWOROTKO
University of South Florida
837,40389.19
21Dmitri V. TALAPIN
University of Chicago
564,98188.95
22Ryoji NOYORI
Nagoya University
625,48688.48
23Chad A. MIRKIN
Northwestern University
23320,50588.00
24Liberato MANNA
Italian Institute of Technology
625,43187.60
25Richard P. VAN DUYNE
Northwestern University
887,69087.39
26Robert H. GRUBBS
California Institute of Technology
17014,61785.98
27Carlos F. BARBAS
Scripps Research Institute
958,02984.52
28James R. HEATH
California Institute of Technology
695,83084.49
29Moungi G. BAWENDI
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
524,36483.92
30David A. CASE
Rutgers University
605,00783.45
31Shouheng SUN
Brown University
846,97082.98
32
[MS 10]
Catherine J. MURPHY
University of Illinois Urbana-Campaign
695,71782.86
33M. G. FINN
Scripps Research Institute
766,28682.71
34Stephen L. BUCHWALD
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
16913,94182.49
35
[MS 4]
Younan XIA
Washington University St. Louis
16113,12081.49
36Stuart L. SCHREIBER
Harvard University
665,36981.35
37
[MS 19]
Taeghwan HYEON
Seoul National University
826,58780.33
38George M. WHITESIDES
Harvard University
22818,23779.99
39Ryong RYOO
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
776,05778.66
40Michael F. RUBNER
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
514,00478.51
41
[MS 20]
Xiangfeng DUAN
University of California Los Angeles
645,02278.47
42
[MS 48]
Michael GRÄTZEL
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne
18714,60278.09
43Gregory C. FU
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1118,38475.53
44
[MS 89]
Horst WELLER
University of Hamburg
735,42874.36
45Joan F. BRENNECKE
University of Notre Dame
654,82774.26
46Kenneth R. SEDDON
Queen’s University Belfast
946,91673.57
47
[MS 8]
Alan J. HEEGER
University of California Santa Barbara
664,75872.09
48Andreas MANZ
Korea Institute of Science and Technology - Europe
705,03071.86
49Hua Chun ZENG
National University of Singapore
533,67369.30
50Suprakas Sinha RAY
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), South Africa
503,41168.22
51Mikhail E. ITKIS
University of California Riverside
604,06967.82
52Osamu TERASAKI
Stockholm University
926,19867.37
53
[MS 29]
Shaik M. ZAKEERUDDIN
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne
634,20466.73
54Wenbin LIN
University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
1046,93066.63
55
[MS 2]
Yadong YIN
University of California Riverside
573,78766.44
56John R. YATES
Scripps Research Institute
865,69666.23
57Samuel I. STUPP
Northwestern University
624,07365.69
58Kimoon KIM
Pohang University of Science and Technology
1288,37565.43
59Prashant V. KAMAT
University of Notre Dame
996,42664.91
60John D. HOLBREY
Queen’s University Belfast
634,01663.75
61
[MS 5]
Jens K. NØRSKOV
Technical University of Denmark
1227,73663.41
62Yugang SUN
Argonne National Laboratory
935,89663.40
63
[MS 75]
Evgeny KATZ
Clarkson University
976,14763.37
64Craig J. HAWKER
University of California Santa Barbara
1418,89363.07
65
[MS 71]
Christian SRRE
Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University
724,51762.74
66Richard H FRIEND
University of Cambridge
744,64262.73
67Jean M. J. FRÉCHET
University of California Berkeley
20912,98562.13
68James M. TOUR
Rice University
1348,32562.13
69Robert C. HADDON
University of California Riverside
845,19161.80
70
[MS 24]
Peter J. STANG
University of Utah
1036,35661.71
71Nicholas A. KOTOV
University of Michigan
784,80961.65
72F. Dean TOSTE
University of California Berkeley
845,16361.46
73Michal KRUK
City University of New York
543,31561.39
74
[MS 83]
Didier ASTRUC
University Bordeaux I
1146,88360.38
75Michael GIERSIG
Free University of Berlin
553,31060.18
76George C. SCHATZ
Northwestern University
20212,11659.98
77Harold G. CRAIGHEAD
Cornell University
513,04259.65
78Keith FAGNOU†
University of Ottawa
633,74759.48
79Milan MRKSICH
University of Chicago
543,16858.67
80Alois FÜRSTNER
Max Planck Institute for Coal Research
1518,85858.66
81Karl Anker JØRGENSEN
Aarhus University
1528,89358.51
82Rustem F. ISMAGILOV
University of Chicago
593,43758.25
83Richard A. FRIESNER
Columbia University
985,69758.13
84Jairton DUPONT
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
1206,96458.03
85John F. HARTWIG
University of Illinois Urbana-Campaign
1679,63857.71
86Robert LANGER
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
985,63257.47
87Mark E. DAVIS
California Institute of Technology
663,79157.44
88Manos MAVRIKAKIS
University of Wisconsin Madison
563,20557.23
89Adi EISENBERG
McGill University
653,72057.23
90Maurice BROOKHART
University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
874,97857.22
91Amir H. HOVEYDA
Boston College
1226,96757.11
92Charles R. MARTIN
University of Florida
583,31257.10
93Alexander ZAPF
University of Rostock
603,40756.78
94Jeffrey R. LONG
University of California Berkeley
985,56356.77
95Neil R. CHAMPNESS
University of Nottingham
864,87756.71
96Naomi J. HALAS
Rice University
734,13156.59
97Abraham NITZAN
Tel Aviv University
512,87956.45
98Charles L. BROOKS
University of Michigan
673,77856.39
99Helmut CÖLFEN
Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces
824,59556.04
100Jérôme CORNIL
University of Mons
653,64056.00
101Geoffrey W. COATES
Cornell University
905,02955.88
† = DECEASED
SOURCE: Essential Science IndicatorsSM from Thomson Reuters, January 1, 2000 – October 31, 2010