metalresearcher
National Hazard
Posts: 732
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: Reactive
|
|
High temperature Retort is made from ... ?
For high-temp experiments (e.g. making Phosphorus) I want to use a retort. Three years ago I tried with mild steel tubes heated in a propane flame to
1200C which burned out with a leak in it and releasing the newly formed Na or K vapor which burned again.
The temperature itself is not an issue. With propane+air or even natural gas+air I can reach 1500C.
So I though about stainless steel (up to 1200 C) but still that burns out in a few times. I have heard about Chrome steel which withstands until 1200C
for more times.
When going to 1500C more exotic metals / alloys are required (Mo, W ?) or even Rh, Ir but these I cannot afford .....
Ceramics such as quartz or Al2O3 will be attacked by molten salts (Ca3(PO4)2 + SiO2 + C for making P or Na2CO3 + C for making Na which vapor also
attacks quartz).
The only possibility is using narrow graphite-clay crucibles of which the bottom is heated till 1500C and the top should be sealed which is another
issue (glueing with softened glass ?).
How do they do it in industry ? Possible beyond reach of amateurs ?
[Edited on 2014-9-16 by metalresearcher]
|
|
|
halogen
Hazard to Others
Posts: 372
Registered: 18-4-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Glassy carbon, industrially, is made by very slowly heating a phenolic (thermostting) polymer in a vacuum. The volatile components of hydrogen and
oxygen are driven out by the extreme heat, leaving a shrunken object. You might, however, try to make an inferior product by using inferior methods.
More reasonably, I believe they extract chucks of carbon out of the ground, jet for instance can be used in jewelry, you might look for larger
specimins of a finer grade like anthractite or coal, and carve out your apparatus from it.
F. de Lalande and M. Prud'homme showed that a mixture of boric oxide and sodium chloride is decomposed in a stream of dry air or oxygen at a red heat
with the evolution of chlorine.
|
|
|
careysub
International Hazard
Posts: 1339
Registered: 4-8-2014
Location: Coastal Sage Scrub Biome
Member Is Offline
Mood: Lowest quantum state
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by metalresearcher  | ...
So I though about stainless steel (up to 1200 C) but still that burns out in a few times. I have heard about Chrome steel which withstands until 1200C
for more times.
When going to 1500C more exotic metals / alloys are required (Mo, W ?) or even Rh, Ir but these I cannot afford .....
Ceramics such as quartz or Al2O3 will be attacked by molten salts (Ca3(PO4)2 + SiO2 + C for making P or Na2CO3 + C for making Na which vapor also
attacks quartz). ...
[Edited on 2014-9-16 by metalresearcher] |
I think it is a mistake to plan on pushing high temperature limits AND do it with highly corrosive, difficult to process, materials. Optimizing for
one or the other is probably easier (i.e. less expensive).
Nickel alloys are used for molten sodium hydroxide and carbonate. Examples are Alloy 600 Inconel nickel-chromium, and Alloy 400 Monel nickel-copper.
http://www.nickelinstitute.org/~/Media/Files/TechnicalLitera...
They are good up to around 1000C.
One foot of 3/4" OD Alloy 400 tubing form MacMaster-Carr costs $45, $54 for Alloy 600.
How about machined graphite crucibles?
http://www.graphitestore.com/items_list.asp/action/prod/prd_...
And then there are the magnesia crucibles from Ozark Technical Ceramics, smaller ones aren't terribly expensive. These go to 2200C, and handle many
very corrosive materials:
http://ozarktech.com/otc-product/mgo-crucibles/
You can probably contact them to ask specific questions about resistance to molten salts.
|
|
|
Dan Vizine
National Hazard
Posts: 628
Registered: 4-4-2014
Location: Tonawanda, New York
Member Is Offline
Mood: High Resistance
|
|
Industrial preparation of P relies on ceramic materials to lead the product vapors away from the reactor which is heated by a huge sets of carbon
electrodes which draw an arc between them. The reactor walls are not directly heated from the outside as you want to do. External heating puts
incredibly high requirements on the material of construction because it has to simultaneously:
a) be a reasonable conductor of heat
b) withstand the corrosive conditions within (at temperature)
Most ceramics can't satisfy (a) very well and no metal will satify (b) for too long. The ceramics that do (a) really well are expensive (SiC, hafnia,
beryllia, and a few others). Since any metal you choose won't last long, it has to be a ceramic. Since the ceramics that have high thermal
conductivity are all expensive, realistically speaking, the choice has to be a reasonably priced ceramic. You just have to tolerate the heating
inefficiency. I'm afraid that you are probably going to have to resign yourself to periodic repair/rebuild episodes. Industry does with their high
temperature equipment.
|
|
|
WGTR
National Hazard
Posts: 971
Registered: 29-9-2013
Location: Online
Member Is Offline
Mood: Outline
|
|
You could try doing the reaction under a vacuum.
I haven't gotten around to trying this again (and posting pictures), but last time I performed the metaphosphate/silica/aluminum reaction (as shown in
the stickied phosphorous thread) it was in a borosilicate test tube. I'm not sure how good the vacuum was, but I was pulling it down with a Fisher
two stage rotary vane pump.
The advantage of using a vacuum is that the phosphorous is distilled out at a much lower temperature than would otherwise be needed. The heat
required, however, was still high enough that the borosilicate tube was collapsing in places.
If the reaction tube is contained within a larger containment vessel that is also under a vacuum, this prevents the reaction vessel from collapsing.
It also keeps oxygen away from the hot reaction tube. The outer vessel could be submerged in water to keep it cool. Heating, obviously, would have
to be electric.
This is a setup that I intend to try at some point, but haven't yet.
The products of my small test tube experiment, however, condensed in the cooler parts of the tube. Letting a little oxygen into the cooled tube gave
a brilliant flash of light, and then an unhealthy glow of vapors as the gradual oxidation commenced. It was a fun experiment, but just a curiosity.
|
|
|
Dan Vizine
National Hazard
Posts: 628
Registered: 4-4-2014
Location: Tonawanda, New York
Member Is Offline
Mood: High Resistance
|
|
So, you're saying that the reason phosphorus furnaces are run so hot is because of volatility issues more than chemistry? I can't reconcile that with
the low bp of phosphorus, it's below 300 C.
Maybe its just a mass transport issue? It seems reasonable that a gentle argon purge might accomplish that. It's simpler than vacuum.
|
|
|
WGTR
National Hazard
Posts: 971
Registered: 29-9-2013
Location: Online
Member Is Offline
Mood: Outline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Dan Vizine | So, you're saying that the reason phosphorus furnaces are run so hot is because of volatility issues more than chemistry? I can't reconcile that with
the low bp of phosphorus, it's below 300 C.
Maybe its just a mass transport issue? It seems reasonable that a gentle argon purge might accomplish that. It's simpler than vacuum.
|
Well, in the case of the industrial method, carbon is used to reduce a phosphate.
https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=65...
From reports that I have seen on SM, this requires "hell fire" temperatures to work. I haven't tried it, personally.
This reaction here is the one that I prefer:
6NaPO3 + 10Al + 3Si02 = 3Na2Si03 + 5Al203 + 3P2
Polverone initially posted it here:
https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=65...
It's a lower temperature reaction than the former one, but I couldn't seem to get it to work in a test tube until I performed it under vacuum. I'm
not sure that I understand why (and I am not well-educated), however, there is a detail that might make a difference.
When there is no gas inside the reaction tube, convection losses are greatly diminished, leaving losses by radiation to predominate, as well as a
little from evaporation of the phosphorous. If there is any appreciable thermal resistance in the reactants, perhaps the heat is better distributed
in the mixture when under a vacuum.
One advantage of using a vacuum, is there is no gas to carry heat up the tube. Glass is a relatively horrible conductor of heat by itself. The
phosphorous boils out of the reaction, and condenses on the tube a couple of inches higher, where the tube can be kept cool.
If the reaction tube is electrically heated in a vacuum chamber, then other materials can be used for the reactor that would ordinarily be oxidized by
air. Also, if the outer chamber is polished (or silvered, like a dewar), then radiation losses aren't too high.
The last time I tried making phosphorous, I didn't have my small kiln. I was heating things with a propane torch. If I can find the time I'll try
making a small batch again. The kiln is temperature controlled, so I can see exactly when things start happening.
|
|
|
Texium
|
Thread Moved
21-11-2023 at 14:15 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
