Sciencemadness Discussion Board

SO3 from Iron Sulphate

Sauron - 2-9-2007 at 05:19

The oldest process for preparation of oleum is the destructive distillation of FeSO4.7H2O (green vitriol, copperas).

Merck says this loses water at 300 C and decomposes at higher temperatures. I suspect this goes:

FeSO4 -> FeO + SO3

If so about half the mass is converted to SO3.

Might this be the basis of a practical lab scale preparation of SO3 or oleum in a tube furnace?

No catalyst required
No SO2 feed required
Relatively modest temperatures (maybe) compared to vanadium process

My tube furnace is 12" x 2" and good for 1100 C which is a lot more than required. If this decomposition will proceed at pyrex temperatures that would be very convenient.

Comments and opinions?

[Edited on 4-9-2007 by Sauron]

Nick F - 2-9-2007 at 06:06

When I was young I made nitric acid by a rather old method, which involved heating potassium nitrate with ferrous sulphate and (if I remember correctly) alum. Not sure what the alum was for. I was only about seven or eight and just doing it in test-tube quantities, but it did work, presumably due to the liberation of sulphur trioxide from the ferrous sulphate.
Pyrex test tubes were fine at the temperatures involved (I heated over a gas flame), but they were rather difficult to clean afterwards....

Sauron - 2-9-2007 at 06:50

If what remains in the tube is Fe) (ferrous oxide) then acid ought to dissolve it out. In any case, a two or three foor length of 2" pyrex tube is cheap enough to be disposible. If the informal calculations I have made in my head are correct than 30 cm x (2.5 cm) squared x pi x 1.8 (density of ferrous sulfate) should be the mass of the charge and about half of that should be SO3 product or about 500 g SO3 theoretically, which ought to make several liters of c.25% oleum, worth a lot more than the frigging pyrex tube.

Xenoid - 2-9-2007 at 07:17

The old way for forming SO3 for the production of fuming sulphuric acid was heating (dry distillation) ferric suphate, not ferrous sulphate!

Fe2(SO4)3 ---> Fe2O3 + 3SO3

Heating ferrous sulphate produces sulphuric acid.

However, ferric sulphate is quite easily prepared from ferrous sulphate.

2FeSO4 + H2SO4 + H2O2 ---> Fe2(SO4)3 + 2H2O

The ferric sulphate crystallises with 9 water molecules and has to be dehydrated first.

But you are right! It does seem to be a simple route for the amateur, no sulphur burners or catalysts!

Regards, Xenoid

[Edited on 2-9-2007 by Xenoid]

Sauron - 2-9-2007 at 07:30

The sources I read specified green vitriol and that is ferrous sulphate monohydrate, not ferric sulphate, sorry. They were quite specific about green vitriol.

"Originally prepared by heating alum, green vitriol and other sulphates, and condensing the products of distillation, sulphuric acid, or at least an impure substance containing more or less sulphur trioxide dissolved in water, received considerable attention at the hands of the alchemists. The acid so obtained from ferrous sulphate (green vitriol) fumes strongly in moist air, hence its name "fuming sulphuric acid"; another name for the same product is "Nordhausen sulphuric acid," on account of the long-continued practice of this process at Nordhausen. " Encyclpedia Britannica 1911

So product is oleum not just H2SO4 but SO3 in H2SO4, which is what I am after. SO3 can always be distilled out of oleum if needed.

It is possible of course that both ferrous and ferric sulphates may undergo this decomposition.

Anyway, do you have any details as to the decomposition temperature of ferric sulphate?

I did manage to look up the mp of FeO, it is 1360 C. So the ferrous sulphate ought to leave black FeO powder behind.



[Edited on 2-9-2007 by Sauron]

not_important - 2-9-2007 at 08:58

I remember ferrous sulfate decomposing in steps, first to a basic sulfate and sulfur dioxide, then the basic sulfate to the oxide and sulfur trioxide.

Ferric sulfate decomposes to the trioxide and oxide at 460 to 500 C, which puts it in the range of the vanadium contact process.

I think ferrous sulfate decomposes somewhat lower than that, starting as low as 380 C. The exact temperature and decomposition products may depend on the actual starting material, 7H2O, 4H2O, or monohydrate, and the heating rate; as well as the amount of air in the system, the iron oxide acting as a catalyst to form SO3 from SO2 and O2.

Older chem books (mid to late 1800s) mention heating either Fe(II) or Fe(III) sulfate as a method of generating SO3 in the lab.

12AX7 - 2-9-2007 at 11:21

This is all hashed in the SO3/H2SO4 thread, Sauron.

ferrous sulfate decomp

Jamjar - 2-9-2007 at 12:26

5730950 Sulfuric acid waste recycling by regenerative process

"Thermal performance data for retorting of ferrous sulfate crystals are in FIG. 2, showing evolution of water of hydration up to about 130.degree. C. and sulfuric acid and sulfur trioxide evolution 14 and 15 at about 680.degree.-750.degree. C. with differential thermal analysis and thermal gravimetric analysis results for heat release and mass change for ferrous sulfate hexahydrate. Undesirable sulfur dioxide production 16 occurs above 750.degree. C. shown in FIG. 3."

"Scale up testing to date for the pilot process indicates that temperature control in the roasting mass of ferrous sulfate is critical. This temperature must not exceed 750.degree. C. At 1000.degree. C. sulfuric acid equilibrium favors sulfur trioxide. At 1100.degree. C. sulfur trioxide decomposition equilibrium favors oxygen and sulfur dioxide."

Sauron - 2-9-2007 at 16:17

Thanks, @jamjar. I will have a look at that patent.

@12AX7, which thread? There are many regarding SO3/H2SO4 and the search engine is really not very helpful.

I read gc's persulfate thread (excellent) and the excellent thread on V2O5 catalysis but saw nothing about iron sulfates,

Anyway I think SO3/oleum is of general interest and a practical bench scale method is not a waste of space.

-------------------

Merck Index does not shed any light on the decomposition of Ferric sulfate.

Ferrous sulfate heptahydrate drops to tetrahydrate at about 56 C and monohydrate at 65 C.

Other sources say that the monohydrate loses water at 300 C. The patent information posted by jamjar indicates the decomposition of FeSO4 to SO3 and FeO occurs between 680 and 750 C and that higher temperatures are to be avoided.

Xenoid's information is that one mol ferric sulfate gives three mols SO3 and one mol Fe2O3. Ferric sulfate is extremely hygroscopic so, must be dried thoroughly first.

In order for FeSO4 to produce oleum rather than SO3 (without using H2SO4 as the receiving solvent) water of hydration must be condensed, so assuming that the monohydrate loses that last H2O at <680 C, then FeSO4 would give only SO3. (leaving FeO behind.)

I need more information. I think I will have a look in Ullmann and in Kirk-Othmer and see what they have to say.

[Edited on 3-9-2007 by Sauron]

12AX7 - 2-9-2007 at 20:39

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=727

Sauron - 2-9-2007 at 21:51

Thanks, but, no one in that thread seems to have been much into citing references. The thread author (Organikum) was talking about 480 C for complete decomposition of ferrous sulfate while Axehandle (who seems to have absented himself since this 2003 thread) said 480 was decomposition temperature for ferric sulfate. Another poster warned that any oxygen from air in the reactor would oxidize FeSO4 to Fe2(SO4)3 at these heats, but apparently he was unaware that ferric sulfate would also decompose to SO3 (or else he would not have been so concerned.)

As Organikum is probably disinclined to be helpful and Axehandle is not around, I am left to find my own way so I am unashamed to have started my own thread.

Rest assured that I will document whatever sources of information I come up with. Anything less is chaos and confusion. That old thread veered off onto numerous tangents, mostly unproductively. I'd like to keep thos one on topic: the decomposition of iron sulfates (ferric or ferrous) to SO3, or oleum - I am not interested in H2SO4 per se.

I admire the work of garage_chemist with persulfate, but it does not lend itself to even modest scaleup.

Likewise I admire Fleaker's work with a bench scale contact process, I am just looking for more simplicity.

[Edited on 3-9-2007 by Sauron]

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 03:06

Jamjar was kind enough to furnish some references:

http://sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=1889&p...
S.C. Wack said
"As for the ferrous sulfate, oxidation to ferric is not a problem, according to Mellor. He says that heating FeSO4.H2O proceeds through the ferric intermediate.The very first prep mentioned of SO3 by him is: Fe2(SO4)3 + distill = Fe2O3 + 3SO3"

Advanced Inorganic Chemistry By Satya Prakash
http://books.google.com/books?id=LmiVsfw46qwC&pg=RA1-PA1...

[Edited on 3-9-2007 by Sauron]

feso4-h2o.jpg - 24kB

Xenoid - 3-9-2007 at 04:11

Sorry, Sauron. That reaction was in my Mellors also, not sure how I missed it!

Perhaps the bisulphate - pyrosulphate is an easier route!

Regards, Xenoid

[Edited on 3-9-2007 by Xenoid]

Mellors001.jpg - 21kB

S.C. Wack - 3-9-2007 at 04:12

The author in Mellor was probably just trying to keep it simple, it was already long known that a basic sulfate was an intermediate from the monohydrate. Some recent investigation into this (and with a basic sulfate identified under the conditions used) and also the differences in heating the different sulfates of iron and other metals can be found (in German of course) here.

[Edited on 3-9-2007 by S.C. Wack]

Attachment: metal_sulfate_decomposition.pdf (1.1MB)
This file has been downloaded 2176 times


Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 04:50

Thanks, that is indeed an illuminating document.

garage chemist - 3-9-2007 at 04:56

The mass/temperature curve for FeSO4 is found on page 41 and that for Fe2(SO4)3 on page 45.

Most interesting is the statement that the decomposition of aluminium sulfate is complete to 80% already at 500°C! This might be a more worthwhile material for experiments than iron sulfates.
Al sulfate loses its crystal water at 130°C and starts giving off SO3 at 350°C.
However, the decomposition only proceeds to a material of the presumed formula Al5O2(SO4)3 whose decomposition to Al2O3 only takes place at 900°C, at which the SO3 almost completely decomposes to SO2 and O2.

Ferric sulfate is the other material that gives good yields of SO3 at comparably low temperatures. Its decomposition is complete at 600-700°C and does not, like ferrous sulfate, give off SO2 first by reduction of half of the sulfate ions.
So turn your FeSO4 into ferric sulfate with H2O2 and H2SO4 and you will be able to get two times as much SO3 out of a given amount of FeSO4.

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 05:29

Ferric sulfate hydrate is purchasable (Alfa Aesar).

Thanks for the comments, fellows.

Fleaker - 3-9-2007 at 08:08

This is the wrong compound, but it's easily remedied as garage chemist mentioned.

FeSO4

270161642946 is the item number on http://www.ebay.com

3.50 USD/pound.

Eclectic - 3-9-2007 at 08:16

From an agricultural supply, it's about $20 for a 50 lb bag. ;)

DerAlte - 3-9-2007 at 11:40

@Sauron - very interesting thread. Do you know the practical temperature limit for a Pyrex tube? I assime it's well below the softening temp.

@S.C. Wack - good reference, will add it to my pile. Pity it's in German, slows me down a bit. It's nice to see a PhD thesis that isn't all useless obfuscation - same goes for patents!

Regards, Der Alte

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 15:42

The manufacturer's say 500 C is max short term working temperature for Pyrex etc., 550 is annealing point, I would think that 450 for continuous duty is likely a reasonable number.

Obviously, therefore, Pyrex and similar borosilicate glassware is not the way to go for this process.

Vycor with its 900 C limit would be ideal, as the process temperature for ferric sulfate decomposition is <700 C.

SS or Monel would also be just fine.

The engineering of the receiving end, is something Fleaker is working out as his SO3 from contact process is exiting at about same temperature. So the first priority is resistance to hot angry SO3, and the second is avoidance of blockage from SO3 solidifying downstream.

Fleaker - 3-9-2007 at 18:33

Yes, and from what I've seen, go with stainless 316. I honestly haven't had a single problem with it! After cooling down, my examination of the inside showed a somewhat bright, reflective interior. I have not run the operation all day and all night at high temperature, but for an hour's work, I would say that stainless is resistant to it.


Quartz and Monel are wallet-busters; even SS316 hurts if it's the flanged stuff (which I used because it's gas tight).

I'm with Sauron: pyrex is a no-go on this. Personally, if I were to do it, I would look for a stainless drum of some sort, some stainless piping, insulation, and a very decent welder. In my mind I am picturing an apparatus somewhat akin to what ordenblitz did for his benzene (decarboxylation of sodium benzoate) still. Seek it in member publications if you've not already looked at it.

If I can find such a piece of equipment, I will definitely give it a shot. While it's nice to have the contact process, it's a bother to set up. Just piling up a bunch of charcoal and heating 10 kgs of ferric sulfate is much simpler--no flow rates, no residence time worries, no hot zone/cool zone concerns, just simplicity.

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 18:50

Two inch 316 seamless 18 inches long to fir my tube furnace, seamless tubing maybe 16 gauge wall (1.5 mm) welded closed with a 316 plug at one end - the plug fitted with an inlet for carrier gas. Other end similarly closed but, with smaller diameter 316 tubing (also seamless) long enough to serve as an air condenser capable of bringing the SO3 down to something like 200 C.

Then a cooling system to remove more heat, to bring the SO3 down to the lower end of its vapor phase, so that solidification is avoided.

Finally, either dissolution in H2SO4 loop or, a series of traps to condense SO3 per se.

I'll be happy to follow Fleaker's lead as he is well ahead of me in practice.

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 20:20

I was just considering the Stoichiometry of the partial decomposition of Al2(SO4)3 to Al5)2(SO4)3 and SO3

That must be 5 Al2(SO4)3 -> 2 Al5O2(SO4)3 + 9 SO3

I believe that is balanced.

So while Fe2(SO4)3 is more efficient on a molar basis, aluminum sulfate might well be competitive on a weight basis - how many mols per Kg? Here the aluminum compound has a slight advantage but, it is utterly begated by the density issue - how many mols can we put in a given volume of reactor?

Ferric sulfate, anhydrous, d 3.1
Aluminum sulfate, anhydrous, d 1.61.

So ferric sulfate wins hands down. More SO3 produced per mol, more mols per volume by far and almost as many mols per Kg.

So now let's go look for a published procedure for converting the ferrous sulfate (so readily available) to ferric sulfate (available but not nearly so readily.).

First stop: Brauser.

Xenoid - 3-9-2007 at 20:50

Quote:
Originally posted by Sauron

So now let's go look for a published procedure for converting the ferrous sulfate (so readily available) to ferric sulfate (available but not nearly so readily.).



Check out my first post, it's from Mellor!

However, ferric sulphate is quite easily prepared from ferrous sulphate. Nitric acid can be used in place of H2O2.

2FeSO4 + H2SO4 + H2O2 ---> Fe2(SO4)3 + 2H2O

Boil the "ingredients" until the solution ceases to give a blue ppt. with K-ferricyanide.
On concentration the solution deposits a whitish mass;

Fe2(SO4)3.9H2O.

The anhydrous salt can be obtained by heating the hydrate.

Regards, Xenoid

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 21:36

I was looking for a wee bit more procedural detail, not that I don't appreciate your thoughtfulness,

Such as, concentrated H2SO4 or what dilution?

What % H2O2? 6%, or 30%?

Any aprticular order of addn?

These little details are nice to know, and I'd just as soon read them as have to work them all out for myself. Merck referres one to Gmelin's Iron, which I do not have, and Brauer was unhelpful.

In the end, I can always just buy it from Alfa, or maybe from the Ozzies, if they have it, or Carlo Erba, or Panreac.

Xenoid - 3-9-2007 at 22:18

Good grief! This is a forum for amateur experimentalism.

There aren't too many possible combinations. Look at the stoichiometry of the reaction.

The strength of the H2O2 doesn't matter just add the right amount.

Try it with what you have got! It's a no brainer. I have seen this reaction described in a 1950's childrens home experimental chemistry book!

This isn't a complex organic preparation!

Regards, Xenoid

Sauron - 3-9-2007 at 22:47

And I'm a trained chemist not a sous-chef.

If I am going to spend time boiling off a lot of excess water, then I'm going to start with as concentrated materials as possible (that are at hand) consistent with safety and good practice.

I have conc H2SO4 18M
H2O2 30%

So we need 2 mols of FeSO4 heptahydrate, so that's 304 g plus 252 g water of hydration so 556 g FeSO4.7H2O

I mol conc H2SO4 is about 55 ml so clearly, the acid should be slowly and cautiously added to the ferrous sulfate, which will heat up and the water of hydration dilutes the acid. Adding the solid to the acid would be stupid. Could splatter.

1 mol of 30% H2O2 is c.100 ml. That goes in last dropwise w/stirring.

The resulting mixture ought to now be warm and weigh about 750 g. According to Xenoid, boil it till negative to ferrous ferricyanide (no blue on rxn w/ potassium ferricyanide) and then concentrate (remove water) till a whitish mas ppts. And this gets worked up. Ought to be 400 g plus 162 g of water of hydration or 562 g of hygroscopic Fe2(SO4)3.9H2O

The implication being that only 200 ml water needs to be taken off.

I suspect that we might be better off starting with 110 ml 50% acid and 200 ml 15% H2O2 so we then have some more water to remove.

Just the sort of uncertainty that I'd rather remove by reading a published procedure first.

[Edited on 4-9-2007 by Sauron]

chloric1 - 4-9-2007 at 02:22

Sauron,

Yes a proceedure would be nice. But you know it might be impossible to find. This forum allows us amatuers a unique opportunity to communicate. You may find yourself writing a proceedure. I would like to see at what temperature ferric sulfate dehydrates. Wonder if Ferric Ammonium Sulfate would be easier to work with, or if it would be reduced to SO2 by the ammonium ion.

Sauron - 4-9-2007 at 03:14

It's just that I have a vast respect for the literature of chemistry. It's out there, somewhere.

The online encyclopedia was slightly helpful. It says ferric sulfate is prepared by adding nitric acid to a hot solution of ferrous sulphate containing sulfuric acid, then concentrating the result. Colorless crystals obtained.

That at least confirms the order of addition, and clearly nitric acid is functioning as an exidizer just as H2O2 does.

Wilkepedia has no entry for iron (III) sulfate - just iron (II).

My library (thus far) is primarily organic and rather spotty on inorganic. ACS search was thus far no help, likewise Google.

----------

Roscoe & Schorlemmer came through, with same reaction described in the 1911 Encyclopedia, and correct stoichiometry, on page 101 of the volume containing chapter on iron. (Attached.)

Concentration of the yellow-brown solution gives a syrupy liquid, which deposits crystals on standing. Adding H2SO4 to the syrup precipitates the anhydrous salt.

Likewise, treating equimolar amounts of FeSO4.7H2O with boiling sulfuric acid gives the same salt Fe2(SO4)3

The salt is extremely hygroscopic. I'd store it in a dessicator over conc sulfuric acid.

[Edited on 4-9-2007 by Sauron]

Attachment: Pages from a_treatise_on_chemistry_2ii.pdf (1.4MB)
This file has been downloaded 681 times


Eclectic - 4-9-2007 at 07:27

Ferric sulfate is available very cheaply for water treatment.
It's a coagulant, and removes H2S, while also precipitating heavy metals.

Sauron - 4-9-2007 at 07:40

Thanks. One of my reagent suppliers localls, sells industrial chemicals as well including water treatment chemicals so they ought to have it in 25 Kg sacks.

And now we know that rather than having to roast it dry, conc sulfuric acid will take up the water of hydration and ppt the anhydrous ferric sulfate. Obviously, there won't be any need to rigoroushly remove the acid, since the anhydrous ferric chloride will be used directly to make oleum and the small amount of acid will be driven off first anyway.

The filtration will need to be done in the glove box to keep the cake from picking up moisture. A nice dry atmosphere will prevent that.

JohnWW - 4-9-2007 at 07:52

Aluminium sulfate, as Al2(SO4)3.18H2O, so-called "alum", appears to be the coagulant of choice for water treatment, though. Ferric sulfate is liable to cause staining, and may corrode metals more electropositive than Fe with which it is in contact, e.g. the Zn and Al plating of "galvanized" tanks and pipes.

Eclectic - 4-9-2007 at 08:15

I think the ferric sulfate is more for industrial wastewater treatment, mine tailing effluent, that sort of thing.
(Unless the municipal water source has H2S or heavy metal contamination that needs to be removed.)

I think it's available as the monohydrate in poly bags.

[Edited on 9-4-2007 by Eclectic]

Information

chloric1 - 4-9-2007 at 12:56

Suaron you are an avid sleuther. I think I downloaded the treatice on Chemistry from Google books. I need to look through it more.

I am glad it is so simple. I now have a use for partially oxidized copperas ;) As far as needing a ferrous sulfate looks like I need to get some steel bars and electrolytically reducing the brown cake I have. :/ Oh well it is all in the name of chemistry fun:D

Sauron - 4-9-2007 at 13:54

Seven volumes of A Treatise on Chemistry are in the forum library - 3 on organic, three on inorganic, and one on organometallic. All gotten from Gallica vis S.C.Wack. Why muck around with Google Books?

catalytic properties of Fe2O3

Aqua_Fortis_100% - 4-9-2007 at 14:42

Quote:
Originally posted by S.C. Wack
The author in Mellor was probably just trying to keep it simple, it was already long known that a basic sulfate was an intermediate from the monohydrate. Some recent investigation into this (and with a basic sulfate identified under the conditions used) and also the differences in heating the different sulfates of iron and other metals can be found (in German of course) here.

[Edited on 3-9-2007 by S.C. Wack]


Yes...
Your book (Mellor - 57) gave very useful information on catalytic properties of iron oxide (from sulfate formation) according with the following :

Quote:
pag 338:
The action of ferric oxide as a catalyst is perceptible at 400°; below 600°, the ferric oxide has only a slight activity, and
above 620°, the activity decreased. The optimum temp, is between 600° and
620° ; and there is then approximately a 70 per cent, conversion. In practice,
however, a conversion of 40 per cent, with a burner gas containing 5-7 per cent,
of sulphur dioxide is considered to be a good result; but, according to F. Haber,
it is doubtful if the equilibrium yield has ever been attained because a long contact
with the catalyst is needed for equilibrium. G. Keppeler and J. d'Ans found the
optimum temp, to be 629° for a mixture containing 2 per cent, of SO2, and there
was a 72-5 per cent, yield ; with 3 per cent. S02, the optimum temp, was 640° ;
with 4 per cent., 650°; and with 7 per cent., 665°. The yields in the last two cases
were respectively 65-0 and 53-2 per cent. A number of attempts have been made
to improve the catalytic activity of ferric oxide. Thus, K. Albert heated a mixture
of ferric oxide with oxide of barium or strontium. The catalysis begins at 400°,
and gives a 94 per cent, conversion at 450° ; nor is the product so sensitive to
moisture as ferric oxide alone.

The catalytic action of ferric oxide has been explained by assuming that ferric
sulphate or a basic ferric sulphate is alternately formed and decomposed, since
ferric sulphate decomposes in the same temp, range as ferric oxide is active as a
catalyst:
2Fe2O3+6SO2+3O2 ---> 2Fe2(SO4)3 ;
Fe2(S04)3 ---> Fe2O3+3SO3.
(...)


So, in practice, maybe , for economy , worth a try any of these .. both Fe2(SO4)3 or Fe2O3 , placed in a tube with strong heat and a flow of dried and already mixed SO2 (from a Sulfur Burner ) and dried air (from e.g. an aquarium pump passing the air through dissecant agents).. The 'waste' SO2 rich gases, after cooled and bubbled in conc H2SO4 for oleum, can be caught by several scrubbers or something similar..

another thought :
Quote:
pag 332:
(...)F. Wohler, and ¥. Mahla observed that the oxides of chromium and copper, at a
dull red-heat, oxidized sulphur dioxide mixed with air to form sulphur trioxide.
The contact catalyst employed is not known.


So , copper sulfate , copper oxide, anything of these would probably work for home setup :D

for copper sulfate/oxide, maybe the catalytic reactions are quite similar , comparing with iron sulfate/oxide:

CuO + SO2 + 1/2O2 ----> CuSO4
CuSO4 -----> CuO + SO3

Can anyone tell me if some of this is wrong?

thanks... good thread

Sauron - 4-9-2007 at 15:29

@aqua_fortis, we aren't employing ferric sulfate as a catalyst, we are decomposing it to SO3. And we aren't oxidizing SO2 in any sort of contact process. That is the subject of an entirely seperate thread. Q.v. Anyway the contact catalyst is V2O5.

There's an entire brand new volume on sulfuric acid manufacture on the industrial scale posted in References in the New Books (Inorganic) thread.

I am quite sure that the performance of oxides of Cu and Fe is inferior to that of vanadium, else, V2O5 would not have been the preferred catalyst for the last century and more.

But you are right, Mellor is always interesting.

jimmyboy - 5-9-2007 at 07:37

I think many sulfates decompose to sulfur dioxide at high temperatures -- I was looking for a table which shows their decomposition temps - no dice - I think sodium bisulfate (easily bought) is the lowest.. not sure

12AX7 - 5-9-2007 at 08:06

SO3 is always produced. SO3 gas comes to equilibrium with SO2 + 1/2 O2 variously at high temperatures, reducing yield.

Decomposing a hotter-burning sulfate in a retort would give the perfect feedstock for the contact process, of course.

Tim

Klute - 5-9-2007 at 08:59

Concerning FeSO4 to Fe2(SO4)3, I remember FeSO4 needs to be kept with a certain amouts of H2SO4 for it to be stable.

I remeber looking at a potential/pH graph for FeSO4, and above a certain pH (between 3 or 5 IIRC), Fe2+ is oxidized to Fe3+ by mere O2. Having SO4 ions from Na2SO4 or a similar unreactive sulfate would possibly furnish the needed SO4 2- anion. I guess in the absence of exces sulfates, it must partially dismute to some oxide. I'll try and find the potential/pH diagram again.

This could diminish the water amount to be evaporated, and bubbling air through a solution overnight (or maybe much less time) would be such a hassle. I don't think Na2So4 would interfer with the SO3 production although that is just an unfouded presumtion.

Sauron - 5-9-2007 at 16:40

I think we have abandoned ferrous sulfate, as ferric sulfate hydrate is supposed to be available in bulk and cheap. So no need to make it. But thanks.

If someone does want to make it from ferrous sulphate, then the simplest method is to boil ferrous sulphate in conc H2SO4, till anhydrous ferric sulfate ppts.

Almost as simple, treat the stoichiometric amount of ferrous sulfate with 50% H2SO4, then add stoichiometric amount of either conc nitric acid, or hydrogen peroxide, and boil till the yellow-brown solution fails to give a blue color with potassium ferricyanide. Then concentrate, till syrupy. Add conc H2SO4 and the anhydrous ferric sulfate ppts out.

The equations are available upthread for both oxidizers.

The first, simpler method involves the hazard of boiling concentrated H2SO4. Exercise caution and protect yourself.

chloric1 - 6-9-2007 at 02:03

Given if the amatueur has ready access to battery acid, the process can be continuous. Andhydrous Ferric sulfate leaves ferric oxide or basic sulfate. This is dissolved in sufuric acid with much stirring and heat reforming ferric sulfate. Some battery acid is retained to make concentrated sulfuric acid s.p. 1.84 and this is added to the ferric sulfate.

Problems that may occur. I have noticed it past attempts ferric oxide is not easily soluble in acids especially if was heated. So a different process may be needed. Maybe the oxide mixed with hot oxalic acid to affect solution followed by decomposition of said oxalate complexs with hot H2SO4

Sauron - 6-9-2007 at 02:55

Look, chances are that ferric sulfate tech grade in 50 lb sacks or whatever costs maybe $1/lb or less. How much blood sweat & tears do you want to invest in turning this into a continuous process by recovering your waste oxide?

It will not be worth the time. The big savings is in what one is making and not trying to squeeze a few cents out of the raw material.

chloric1 - 6-9-2007 at 17:31

Well there is one supplier I know of for ferric sulfate but before I order that I am going to use what I already have. What I have is partially oxidized copperas. I will be able to make Ferric Sulfate and ferrous sulfate. The oxide recovery is kinda a brain fart but i usually do well to reuse what I can. Not only for economic reasons but for accessability reasons.

Ozone - 6-9-2007 at 19:18

Just a little bit of anectodotal information:

In sugar mills (outside of the US) they use sulfitation to produce a white sugar product directly from cane. It is known in that industry that if too much O2 enters the sulfur stove (burner) that the piping is eaten out at a (scarefully) uneconomical rate. This is attributed to stoicheometric conversion to SO3 (and, with water, H2SO4 in the pipes).

In this industry, the sulfur burner is a horizontally mounted cylinder which is open to air. The rising heat pulls in the air through a baffle to facilitate (the correct) stoicheometric combustion. A guy stands there and shovels in S8 from a wheelbarrow.

It burns this really neat, almost UV purple color when it is making pure SO2 (don't know about what it looks like if making SO3, because they try very hard to avoid this).

How about a sulfur stove with an O2 feed line?

What the hell,

O3

Xenoid - 8-9-2007 at 21:15

Another reference just for the sake of completeness and all the girls out there!

Are there any girls out there?

Heyes, H.L. 1949 : Chemistry Experiments At Home For Boys and Girls. Chapter (IV) pp 75-76. George G. Harrap & Co. Ltd. Ed. 1957.

Regards, Xenoid

Exps.jpg - 39kB

Sauron - 8-9-2007 at 23:47

Thanks @Xenoid.

Let's keep in mind that ferric sulfate is more productive of SO3 than ferrous sulfate, and apparently about as available and economical.

And aluminum sulfate might be competitive with ferrous sulfate though not in the ferric sulfate class. It also is on the threshold of being doable in pyrex unlike either of the iron sulfates - regardless of your old clipping. Aluminum sulfate is the only one that will go at 500 C which is th upper limit of pyrex and similar borosilicate glasses. They anneal at 550 C.

It is not an accident that high temp Glas Col mantles top out to 450 C. They are designed to heat pyrex.

But again, thanks.

Temperature control

ciscosdad - 11-9-2007 at 18:38

From my limited understanding of the topic, it seems that there is a rather restricted range of useful temperatures to get this to work. 750 Deg C max to keep the SO3 intact and whatever temp is required to decompose the selected sulfate.
Obviously if a temp comtrolled muffle furnace was used, then the problem would be solved, but what about some improvised method for use by amateurs? I like the idea of using charcoal as the heating method, but temp control is quite iffy. What about some sort of "double boiler" type arrangement but using a liquid metal as the heat transfer medium? Aluminum comes to mind if an operating temp approximating its MP was used (630C?). Use the presence of solid AL metal as an indication of the temp being at the MP. That would be comfortably under the magic 750 and over the published decomposition temps.
I realise it would not be as strightforward as all that, but is it worth considering?

Sauron - 11-9-2007 at 19:33

Quite a few of us (forum members) have tube furnaces. I've posted pics of mine; see the SO3 contact process thread for another from same maker (Thermolyne). I got mine for $100 on LabX. They usually top out at 1000-1200 C and have thermocouple controls.

Eclectic - 12-9-2007 at 13:32

If you order ferric sulfate in a 50lb bag, expect to get the NONAHYDRATE, not the monohydrate.

Dehydration in an oven should not be too difficult, unless the material dissolves in it's own water of crystallization.

Edit: So far so good at 300F in a glass tray. My supplier was totally unreceptive to the idea that he should make a price adjustment or at least edit his product description. :mad:

[Edited on 9-12-2007 by Eclectic]

Sauron - 12-9-2007 at 16:04

Yeah the stuff is very hygroscopic

I reckon a big sack once opened will need to be repacked immediately into airtight bottles.

I do have a drying oven by Memmert, good sized one, thermostated and exhausted.

Eclectic - 12-9-2007 at 17:58

It doesn't seem to be very deliquescent.

5 gallon plastic buckets with Gammaseal lids are convenient for storing this sort of thing.

http://freckleface.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/gammaseals.htm...

Edit: No problem with melting or fuming while drying in an oven at up to 450F. Probably no predrying is needed. I bet this stuff would make a great alcohol dehydration catalyst. ;)

[Edited on 9-12-2007 by Eclectic]

OK, yes, it is deliquescent. Not as bad as calcium chloride, but a few granules left on the counter in an air conditioned environment will start to get damp after 4-5 hours.

[Edited on 9-13-2007 by Eclectic]

Ferrous vs Ferric

ciscosdad - 8-10-2007 at 18:37

Has anyone wondered why the traditional method of vitriol production used the ferrous salt?
There seems to be absolutely no reference to the ferric at all in the preps.

Xenoid - 8-10-2007 at 19:36

Quote:
Originally posted by ciscosdad
Has anyone wondered why the traditional method of vitriol production used the ferrous salt?
There seems to be absolutely no reference to the ferric at all in the preps.


Ferrous sulphate occurs naturally as copperas or melanterite. It was also made readily from iron pyrites (fool's gold, FeS2) a very common mineral, by the action of air and moisture, the resulting solution being treated with scrap iron.

Ferric sulphate is normally made from ferrous sulphate. It could be considered as an "intermediate compound" in the production of sulphuric acid from ferrous sulphate.

Regards, Xenoid

Sauron - 8-10-2007 at 19:39

The ferrous salt gives SO3 in H2SO4 (oleum) and some losses to SO2.

The ferric salt gives neat SO3.

ciscosdad - 8-10-2007 at 19:50

Thanks guys.
I understand that ferric is better as there is no loss of SO3 oxidising the ferrous to ferric during roasting. It just seems strange that the old chemists didn't pick up on the refinement given the obvous improvement in yield. The copperas oxidises easily enough with air. Perhaps that was one of the trade secrets that never got published.

@Sauron. Sorry to jiggle your elbow here, but we are waiting with bated breath for your account of Oleum production using this method.:P

Sauron - 8-10-2007 at 19:58

Everything awaits installation of fume hood, and that awaits sufficient funds to start. Fume hood and scrubber will cost me $7000 (it's a big hood!) and this has been a crappy year for $$.

Ferrous vs Ferric

ciscosdad - 18-10-2007 at 15:37

Ref p244 - 5 of the Knapp "Chemical Technology" vol 1
Right at the end of the Oleum article.
(posted by S.C.Wack earlier in this thread).
It implies that they lightly air roasted the ferrous sulfate to form (basic) ferric sulfate. They were certainly aware of the advantages.
Now I know. Those old guys were not so silly eh?
I particularly appreciate the older generation of books that focus on the "how to" and the "what happens". The modern obsession with the "why is it so" is depriving us of most of the fun in Chemistry.

BTW. Thanks a million for the book S.C.Wack. I am reading it cover to cover. If you are aware of anything similar, please post that too.

Fleaker - 19-10-2007 at 08:45

I think I might give this a shot on a large scale. Anyone think a stainless stock pot and some stainless tubing would be up to the task? (I'm envisioning building a fire around it, then having the SO3 lead into sulfuric). I think the heating vessel is the biggest problem with the whole method.

[Edited on 19-10-2007 by Fleaker]

Eclectic - 19-10-2007 at 13:17

An old steel CO2 tank might be better.

ciscosdad - 21-10-2007 at 15:04

Charcoal and a draft may be a better heat source than wood.

garage chemist - 4-2-2008 at 13:31

I made some anhydrous ferric sulfate today, and want to warn people that the reaction of Fe2O3 and H2SO4 can be violent, something I never saw mentioned anywhere.

Three different sources say that ferric sulfate can be made by strong heating of ferric oxide with conc. sulfuric acid, and this sounds like a better method of production than aqueous methods since only little water (that arising from the reaction) has to be driven off afterwards.
Well, the reaction even drives out the water by itself, in a spectacular manner!

Here's what I did:
I mixed 30g Fe2O3 (commercial red pigment) and 60g conc. H2SO4 (roughly stochiometric amounts) together in a beaker, forming a paste without reacting.
I then proceeded to heat this with a flame while stirring. As it became hot, at one point the entire mass suddenly started to bubble uncontrollably and then immediately erupted into a fountain of steam!
The solid/liquid contents of the beaker stayed in there, however. The mix was very hot and of a thick pasty consitence after that, and I continued to heat it while stirring until a dry brownish powder resulted, giving off some more steam in the process.
Its weight corresponded very well to the expected weight of neutral anhydrous ferric sulfate from this reaction, and I put it into a jar for storage.

The violent reaction makes this method of preparation unsuitable for direct upscaling. One would have to heat the Fe2O3/H2SO4 slurry in portions of no more than 100g each.

The final dehydration could then be done in an oven.

For making up to 100g ferric sulfate at a time, the method I described is very fast and convenient.

How the product performs in the SO3 synthesis will be the next subject of investigation.

[Edited on 4-2-2008 by garage chemist]

chloric1 - 4-2-2008 at 14:23

Well, if I go that route, I will do the 100 g Ferric sulfate in a 1000ml beaker. I wonder at what temperature your reaction "took off"? I wonder if a hot spot from your flame far exceeded the temperature of startup. When you said pigment grade iron oxide I imagined distinctive red oxide as apposed to the more orangy more hydrated variety. Orangy is a word because I just now invented it.:D:D

garage chemist - 4-2-2008 at 14:42

There are many different types of iron oxide reds available, some of them not even pure Fe2O3 (I hope mine is pure!).
I have two different ones, one (source somewhat dubious and long gone) is more brightly red, the other (from a ceramics supplier) is more brownish. I used the bright red one in the synth because I had less than 100g left of it and wanted to use it up before opening the bag of the brownish one.

I originally wanted to heat the reaction mix as uniformly as possible and therefore stirred very well. So the whole reaction mix was brought close to the takeoff temperature instead of only one hotspot, which may have contributed to the remarkably violent reaction.

chloric1 - 4-2-2008 at 15:56

OK, well I have some bright red iron oxide and I will try this in 1 gram Fe2O3 vs. drops of H2SO4 scale in a test tube to just see for myself how violent it really is. Hopefully I can find a suitable thermometer to measure the reaction temperature.