Chemistry vacuum pumps

Labarbapostiza

I was thinking, I don't have the space for this at the moment, but I've been thinking.

Using the pump from an old fridge as a vacuum pump, for applications in a home lab.

What are the pros and cons of vacuum pumps in chemistry? I've never used one. But I'd like to see things like flash freezing under vacuum.

Other things.....using a pressure cooker as a source for steam. And can a pressure cooker be used for high pressure chemistry, without the risk of blowing yourself to pieces?

zl1whqvjs75cdy

What exactly do you want to do under high pressure?

Labarbapostiza

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

What exactly do you want to do under high pressure?

The Haber process

No.


I was just interest in something like seeing if a mix of carbohydrates and water, under high pressure can create more complex hydrocarbons (oils etc)...............Haber, I believe, blew up two factories experimenting with diesel production via high pressure chemistry.

What I'd really like is (I don't have a garage, but would really love one) a place to set up a gentleman scientist's science lab. With lots of stuff. I'd like a desktop spectral analyser, . A microscope; where I can look at stuff on my computer....and a tunnelling microscope for even smaller stuff......and an oscilloscope. Do all kinds of stuff; biology, physics, electronics.

Labarbapostiza

Does anyone here have a home lab, made from improvised materials?

You know, like ripping apart an old coffee maker to work as a hot plate, instead of buying one made for labs.

nibble

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

What I'd really like is (I don't have a garage, but would really love one) a place to set up a gentleman scientist's science lab. With lots of stuff. I'd like a desktop spectral analyser, . A microscope; where I can look at stuff on my computer....and a tunnelling microscope for even smaller stuff......and an oscilloscope. Do all kinds of stuff; biology, physics, electronics.

Uh a piece of equipment like that alone is going to cost upwards of €20-30k, probably considerably upwards. Also do you have any sort of training/background in any of these areas?

As for the pump, a used oil vacuum pump shouldn't be too hard to find with some digging. That said I'm not sure where exactly.
Plug in ceramic hotplates for cooking can be had very cheaply, pointless to try and use something inferior - they're essentially exactly the same as a basic laboratory hotplate.

Also you certainly won't be making any hydrocarbons from carbohydrates and water in a pressure cooker.

Finally don't mess around with high pressure, heat or potentially dangerous chemicals unless you know what you're doing.

Labarbapostiza

nibble wrote: »

Uh a piece of equipment like that alone is going to cost upwards of €20-30k, probably considerably upwards.

No. The prices on tunnelling microscopes has steeply fallen. Currently you can buy them for little over a grand. It's a much less difficult to produce device than an electron microscope. If there was a bigger market, say if all schools bought one or two, the prices would fall to the low hundreds. It's only as about as complicated as a common domestic printer or scanner.

It would also be nice if desktop spectral analysers had a huge mass market, so their prices would come down too. (that is for chemical spectral analyses)

Also do you have any sort of training/background in any of these areas?

What exactly makes you ask a question like that? You know the typical high volume chemical businesses in Ireland, insist that their bucket men can barely read or write let alone have a rudimentary understanding of chemistry. In fact a rudimentary knowledge of chemistry would disqualify an individual from such a position. I believe having at least a vague idea of what I'm doing, puts me at a safety advantage.

As for the pump, a used oil vacuum pump shouldn't be too hard to find with some
digging. That said I'm not sure where exactly.

I'm interested in the fridge pump for a number of reasons. The whole electrical and electronic control system is there. I've heard of them being repurposed as mini-compressors for spray painting. They're designed to be as quite as possible. I don't know if it can be used as a vacuum pump for desktop chemistry. I've seen photos of the fridge part of old fridges being used as the cooler for condensers.

Plug in ceramic hotplates for cooking can be had very cheaply, pointless
to try and use something inferior - they're essentially exactly the same as a
basic laboratory hotplate.

Naked flames is something I'd like to avoid.

Also you certainly won't be making any hydrocarbons from carbohydrates and water
in a pressure cooker.

Are you sure?......Have you actually tried?...........I was also thinking of other purposes, more mid-pressure chemistry. That is, reactions that require temperature too high for ordinary glassware, maybe they might work at a much lower temperature, in a high pressure container (I think the old chemistry term is a bomb).

Finally don't mess around with high pressure, heat or potentially dangerous
chemicals unless you know what you're doing.

Of course, I'm not an absolute idiot. The high pressure chemistry experiments will be conducted by my assistant, and there will be at the very least six inches of brick between me and the apparatus, while they are in progress.

I believe Haber, in scaling up his processes to industrial scale, was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people when the apparatuses failed to function to plan........The great man was nowhere near the plants when these failures occurred......Would you be?

nibble

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

No. The prices on tunnelling microscopes has steeply fallen. Currently you can buy them for little over a grand. It's a much less difficult to produce device than an electron microscope. If there was a bigger market, say if all schools bought one or two, the prices would fall to the low hundreds. It's only as about as complicated as a common domestic printer or scanner.

Well that sounds great, any sources giving pricing for a domestic user? Also what are you planning on actually doing with one?

What exactly makes you ask a question like that? You know the typical high volume chemical businesses in Ireland, insist that their bucket men can barely read or write let alone have a rudimentary understanding of chemistry. In fact a rudimentary knowledge of chemistry would disqualify an individual from such a position. I believe having at least a vague idea of what I'm doing, puts me at a safety advantage.

You don't really believe that, do you? They have distinct safety protocols etc in place, even if the low-level operatives have little theoretical knowledge they know what they have to do and how to do it safely. You're just not going to get that kind of set-up in your garage.

Naked flames is something I'd like to avoid.

Who mentioned naked flames? I was talking about a hotplate. Which is exactly what you were looking for.

Are you sure?......Have you actually tried?...........I was also thinking of other purposes, more mid-pressure chemistry. That is, reactions that require temperature too high for ordinary glassware, maybe they might work at a much lower temperature, in a high pressure container (I think the old chemistry term is a bomb).

I have not. Through what reaction mechanisms would such transformations take place?

Of course, I'm not an absolute idiot. The high pressure chemistry experiments will be conducted by my assistant, and there will be at the very least six inches of brick between me and the apparatus, while they are in progress.

I'm certainly not suggesting you're an idiot and I don't mean to sound hostile but it's all just a bit fanciful, sentences like that especially make it all seem rather pie in the sky sort of stuff. What do you actually want to do?


Electronics is a great hobbyist activity, a small investment to purchase some basic stuff and you're away. Very easy to self-learn a lot of theory and practice with it too, huge amounts of material online. Less explosions/third degree burns too.

Labarbapostiza

nibble wrote: »

Well that sounds great, any sources giving pricing for a domestic user?

Nanosurf are saying they have one for every budget; even home use. But they're being cagey about price.


http://www.windsorscientific.co.uk/index.php are selling demo models at a discount.

The price on these things has always been in the economies of scale. Home brew versions have always been cheap to build. If some government like Germany or Japan, ordered one for each of their schools, the prices could be quite low. It being the 21st century, maybe it's about time school kids were using kit that's a bit more advanced than what they had in the 19th.

A bigger mass market would as mean a price fall for more sophisticated devices.

Also what are you planning on actually doing with one?

I was planning to look at some atoms. Who would not want to do that....at least once in their life.

You don't really believe that, do you? They have distinct safety protocols
etc in place, even if the low-level operatives have little theoretical knowledge
they know what they have to do and how to do it safely. You're just not going to
get that kind of set-up in your garage.

Chernobyl had safety protocols. I have a strong desire for self-preservation.

Who mentioned naked flames? I was talking about a hotplate. Which is exactly
what you were looking for.

Naked flames are the single biggest hazard, if you're doing table top chemistry. Watching a class mate go up in flames, due to a reflux gone wrong, put me off 'trying this at home'. He wasn't badly burned, but the glass did fly everywhere.

I have not. Through what reaction mechanisms would such transformations
take place?

Le Chatelier's Principle, I believe; the higher the pressure, the smaller the number of molecules are preferred. And this is the process by which, complex oils are formed from less complex hydrocarbons under pressure. Haber developed a process for making fuel oil from coal. Close to five hundred people died before they got the process right.

I'm beginning to think the whole idea might be a little dangerous. Manchester University have their high pressure bomb in a purpose built blast bay. They also remote control it.......But hey, what's there to stop me from building a blast bay, and wiring it for remote operation myself.

I'm certainly not suggesting you're an idiot and I don't mean to sound
hostile but it's all just a bit fanciful, sentences like that especially make it
all seem rather pie in the sky sort of stuff. What do you actually want to do?

Just I suppose, to make stuff and have a better understanding off the world. Keep my mind off things......like how it's better in life to be really stupid.

Electronics is a great hobbyist activity, a small investment to purchase some basic stuff and you're away. Very easy to self-learn a lot of theory and practice with it too, huge amounts of material online. Less explosions/third degree burns too.

What about electrocution?................

papu

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Nanosurf are saying they have one for every budget; even home use. But they're being cagey about price.


http://www.windsorscientific.co.uk/index.php are selling demo models at a discount.

The price on these things has always been in the economies of scale. Home brew versions have always been cheap to build. If some government like Germany or Japan, ordered one for each of their schools, the prices could be quite low. It being the 21st century, maybe it's about time school kids were using kit that's a bit more advanced than what they had in the 19th.

A bigger mass market would as mean a price fall for more sophisticated devices.


I was planning to look at some atoms. Who would not want to do that....at least once in their life.


Chernobyl had safety protocols. I have a strong desire for self-preservation.

Naked flames are the single biggest hazard, if you're doing table top chemistry. Watching a class mate go up in flames, due to a reflux gone wrong, put me off 'trying this at home'. He wasn't badly burned, but the glass did fly everywhere.


Le Chatelier's Principle, I believe; the higher the pressure, the smaller the number of molecules are preferred. And this is the process by which, complex oils are formed from less complex hydrocarbons under pressure. Haber developed a process for making fuel oil from coal. Close to five hundred people died before they got the process right.

I'm beginning to think the whole idea might be a little dangerous. Manchester University have their high pressure bomb in a purpose built blast bay. They also remote control it.......But hey, what's there to stop me from building a blast bay, and wiring it for remote operation myself.

Just I suppose, to make stuff and have a better understanding off the world. Keep my mind off things......like how it's better in life to be really stupid.


What about electrocution?................

You have absolutely no hope of looking at atoms.

We have nanosurf desktop AFM's in the lab here , they cost thousands of euros and we let the undergrads use them (ie they are muck and rarely work)

An STM set up will set you back close to 100Grand , thats not including the vibration isolators , the cryogenics , the computer software , the piezoelectrics , the preamps and most importantly the knowledge. You'd want 2 - 3 years training to be able to operate a STM properly.

You're not going to electrocute yourself using Raspberry Pi's and low voltage electronics.

nibble

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Naked flames are the single biggest hazard, if you're doing table top chemistry. Watching a class mate go up in flames, due to a reflux gone wrong, put me off 'trying this at home'. He wasn't badly burned, but the glass did fly everywhere.

I was talking about ceramic electric hotplates. No naked flames involved.

Le Chatelier's Principle, I believe; the higher the pressure, the smaller the number of molecules are preferred. And this is the process by which, complex oils are formed from less complex hydrocarbons under pressure. Haber developed a process for making fuel oil from coal. Close to five hundred people died before they got the process right.

Well you mentioned placing carbohydrates under these conditions in order to produce hydrocarbons. Carbohydrates =/= hydrocarbons, they're two rather distinct groups of compounds. The only way that is going to happen (in any significant way at least) is through mechanisms involving some form of catalysis.

What about electrocution?................

In electronics you're going to be dealing with low voltages and primarily power sources incapable of supplying enough current to do any harm. The risk of electrocution is very low by just being even a little careful. You don't even need to involve mains AC power at all, a few alkaline batteries or similar is going to drive basic microcontrollers, PICs or other simple DC circuitry.

papu

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

I was thinking, I don't have the space for this at the moment, but I've been thinking.

Using the pump from an old fridge as a vacuum pump, for applications in a home lab.

What are the pros and cons of vacuum pumps in chemistry? I've never used one. But I'd like to see things like flash freezing under vacuum.

Other things.....using a pressure cooker as a source for steam. And can a pressure cooker be used for high pressure chemistry, without the risk of blowing yourself to pieces?

Pro's doing science under vacuum.

Cons , Cost of pump , cost of running , cost of maintenance , Price of gaskets , flanges , chambers ,windows , gauges , valves. Risk of explosions.

Other things to consider , Out-gassing , Baking and purging.

fergaldevlin

I think you answered your own question in the first inst. "........ I was thinking......!" You should swap the word thinking for Google and leave the doing to guys who stayed awake during their lectures. I can't believe you got so many answers to this daft post.

Labarbapostiza

fergaldevlin wrote: »

I think you answered your own question in the first inst. "........ I was thinking......!" You should swap the word thinking for Google and leave the doing to guys who stayed awake during their lectures. I can't believe you got so many answers to this daft post.

Oh aren't you so clever....Mr four posts Fergal Devlin.

I shouldn't really stoop, and converse with what is such an obvious orifice for the excretion of biological waste material, but I may as well use the response to get the thread going again.

I've too busy, tired, etc over the last few months to do much stuff. but I have been working on it. I'm close to having a space, with access to equipment and various electrical and electronic pieces of junk to play with. I've already begun playing around with and relearning,

Ferghal, you are talking crap. I could have been catty with Papu. It doesn't talk 2 to 3 years to learn a piece of equipment. It doesn't take 2 to 3 years to read a service manual, and look a the data sheets for the components on a board, to even identify what a branded chip actual is. Undergrads are rarely taught useful skills, like electronics trouble shooting and repair.

If anyone is throwing out a broken nanosurf,, I'll take it.......

papu

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Oh aren't you so clever....Mr four posts Fergal Devlin.

I shouldn't really stoop, and converse with what is such an obvious orifice for the excretion of biological waste material, but I may as well use the response to get the thread going again.

I've too busy, tired, etc over the last few months to do much stuff. but I have been working on it. I'm close to having a space, with access to equipment and various electrical and electronic pieces of junk to play with. I've already begun playing around with and relearning,

Ferghal, you are talking crap. I could have been catty with Papu. It doesn't talk 2 to 3 years to learn a piece of equipment. It doesn't take 2 to 3 years to read a service manual, and look a the data sheets for the components on a board, to even identify what a branded chip actual is. Undergrads are rarely taught useful skills, like electronics trouble shooting and repair.

If anyone is throwing out a broken nanosurf,, I'll take it.......

It does take 2-3 years to learn how to do any kind of meaningful STM, but please by all means, try assembling one and learn to use it yourself..
Undergrads aren't taught to fix the equipment because that work is left to the technicians. Undergrads learn practical skills from labs, internships, and interests outside of college.

Labarbapostiza

papu wrote: »

Undergrads aren't taught to fix the equipment because that work is left to the technicians. Undergrads learn practical skills from labs, internships, and interests outside of college.

Well, I feel the undergrads should be thought how to fix the equipment - at the very least they'll have sometime to fall back on if the HRs for various companies don't think their a good "fit". And there was a time lab technicians used to build equipment for their colleges. Now they change fuses, maybe solder a capacitor (or shovel it off to a third party for repair).

Tearing down equipment and perusing circuits can greatly improve the quality of students knowledge. Yes, I know, many will ultimately desire to find themselves among the Eloy of the science and technology bureaucracy; which is far more important, creative, and better paid, than doing the actual dirty stuff of touching things; tasks reserved for the Morlocks. If post grads are doing serious research, they should know their equipment inside out. They then may be able to improve the designs of what they're working with. Get a jump on the competition, or at least not mistake Moire patterns in the image aliasing as some radical new discovery.

It does take 2-3 years to learn how to do any kind of meaningful STM, but
please by all means, try assembling one and learn to use it yourself..

Yeah, well, you initially said 2-3 years to learn how to use the equipment. To read all the literature a get up to speed, could take 2-3 years.

Have you built an STM from scratch?

papu

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Well, I feel the undergrads should be thought how to fix the equipment - at the very least they'll have sometime to fall back on if the HRs for various companies don't think their a good "fit". And there was a time lab technicians used to build equipment for their colleges. Now they change fuses, maybe solder a capacitor (or shovel it off to a third party for repair).

Tearing down equipment and perusing circuits can greatly improve the quality of students knowledge. Yes, I know, many will ultimately desire to find themselves among the Eloy of the science and technology bureaucracy; which is far more important, creative, and better paid, than doing the actual dirty stuff of touching things; tasks reserved for the Morlocks. If post grads are doing serious research, they should know their equipment inside out. They then may be able to improve the designs of what they're working with. Get a jump on the competition, or at least not mistake Moire patterns in the image aliasing as some radical new discovery.





Yeah, well, you initially said 2-3 years to learn how to use the equipment. To read all the literature a get up to speed, could take 2-3 years.

Have you built an STM from scratch?

I don't know where you're getting your information but the Lab Techs that I've worked with actively repair experiments which are broken and are part of the process in implementing and running new experiments. There is no money for equipment to be sent away.

If you do a PhD , inevitably things will break, Sometimes you can fix it yourself, most times this is counter productive as 1. you'll probably end up breaking it more. 2. It's less trouble to send away. But if its something you've designed and built you have no other option.

The Powerboard on my Cryostat compressor broke last year, instead of fixing we replaced the unit, less dangerous.

No I haven't built an STM by scratch , But I can send you a picture of one in the basement here that was built by a PhD student over 4 years. I don't think it even works.

SOL

Hilarity not with standing, I will close this thread if it changes into a personal insult thread.


If you want to, feel free to start a new thread telling us how you feel physics and chemistry students would be better off learning about machine maintenance and repair rather than physics or chemistry.
I'm sure the people designing these courses have given no thought whatsoever into the material they have the students cover and I'm sure the students in these courses are just gagging for extra material to be covered because they don't have enough to do already...

Labarbapostiza

papu wrote: »

I don't know where you're getting your information but the Lab Techs that I've worked with actively repair experiments which are broken and are part of the process in implementing and running new experiments. There is no money for equipment to be sent away.

Well, not all places are the same, and either are lab techs for that matter.

If you do a PhD , inevitably things will break, Sometimes you can fix it
yourself, most times this is counter productive as 1. you'll probably end up
breaking it more. 2. It's less trouble to send away.

Yes, which is why if you're well practiced (you've made your messes with less critical equipment), you may be able to do a very neat and fast repair. If you don't have that skill, trying to learn on the fly on some expensive equipment, would indeed be highly counter productive.

No I haven't built an STM by scratch , But I can send you a picture of one in the basement here that was built by a PhD student over 4 years. I don't think it even works.

Go ahead, post the pic.

Labarbapostiza

SOL wrote: »

Hilarity not with standing, I will close this thread if it changes into a personal insult thread.

I'm not the one throwing personal insults, I was merely deflecting. Okay, yes, I shouldn't have been deflecting either.

If you want to, feel free to start a new thread telling us how you feel physics and chemistry students would be better off learning about machine maintenance and repair rather than physics or chemistry.

No......My point is, that machine know how, is something that could be very useful and complementary.

I'm sure the people designing these courses have given no thought whatsoever into the material they have the students cover and I'm sure the students in these courses are just gagging for extra material to be covered because they don't have enough to do already...

Complementary approaches lend themselves to a richer learning environment and experience. That is in my opinion. I'm sure you have your own opinion.

papu

Benchtop AFM

Big AFM


HomeBuilt STM

Working STM

ianobrien

OP, as somebody who works in the Pharma/Biopharma sector and the site's mass spec SME I can tell you I can't officially open the cover of it. Sure I can (and did) fix and rebuild them from my time in my PhD but in the real world, everything is under maintenance contracts (or the onsite metrology group if it's cheaper to have the experts on-site). The contracts are generally either 24hr, 48hr or 72hr response (contract depending) from the maintenance supplier/manufacturer and if the instrument goes off-line it's a phone call.

A maintenance contract is much easier for me the user and the company. The costs are fixed for the year no matter what breaks and there are no training costs and no variable maintenance/parts costs. I don't have to worry about keeping spares in the press (and the costs of them) and keep up to date with service packs, PM's, etc.

Also, as somebody who worked in API synthetic route development and fitting that route into an API site, a domestic pressure cooker is not a viable source of steam (you'll have to open it to refill it and the capacity is too small) and it can't take the pressures you are talking about.

thecornflake

papu wrote: »

HomeBuilt STM

Working STM

Is that a SIMS set up also ?