 
| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 15 May 2015 16:15:44 +0000 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Message-ID: |
|
| Subject: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
| From: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> One mole of a gas will fill 22.4 liters (just over half a deep), and Acetic is 60 grams per mole. So, those using 80%
> acetic will need to start with 125% of the calculated amount of solution. Using 99%, you'd only need 101% of the
> calculated amount.
Based on this, it sounds like using @ 99% confers neither advantage nor disadvantage - one just needs to use less than the volume of recommended 80%.
> I remember Andony Melathopoulos giving a talk in the past few years about a
> study they ran comparing Acetic, Heat, and E-Beam. I am pretty sure he used 80% acetic.
Time and time again, we come back to 80%. I still find myself wondering if at some point in the past, this was simply the most commonly available concentration, which lead to the simplification of Bailey's original recommendation of =/>80%, to simply =80%.
Based on responses, I see no reason *not* to use my 99%, undiluted - I can just use less of it.
Thank you to everyone who responded.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|
