A possible chemical reason that this experiment yielded less than 100% triphenylcarbinol was caused by the Grignard reagent reacting with atmospheric water or oxygen instead of reacting with benzophenone due to the highly reactive nature of the Grignard reagent and a constant presence of humidity and moisture inside the laboratory. Although extra precautions were taken to dry to glassware and a CaCl2 drying tube was used, there was an unavoidable exposure of the Grignard reagent to atmospheric oxygen and water due to the operating conditions within the laboratory, especially occurring after each time the drying tube was removed to add additional solvents or reagents. The Grignard reagent could have reacted with atmospheric water to protonate
…show more content…
Therefore, the melting point range supported the formation of the desired product because the experimental value obtained was relatively close to the theoretical value. The melting point for all of the reagents, products and solvents used in this experiment were much farther from this value than that of triphenylcarbinol and this supported the formation of the desired product because its values matched most closely with the data obtained. The reason that the melting point range was considerably wider and lower than the theoretical value was due to the presence of impurities in the sample. The data suggests that the sample was contaminated with another substance such as unreacted benzophenone, which has a melting point range from 47.0 °C – 49.0 °C, and may have caused the melting point to decrease and resulted in a broader range from the theoretical value. Therefore, although the melting point range obtained indicates that triphenylcarbinol was formed it also suggests that there were some impurities …show more content…
Ether which was the solution’s solvent has a relatively low boiling point, and a rapid increase in temperature may have increased the risk of fire and caused excessive bubbling. The slow addition of benzophenone allows the solution to gradually dissipate heat to the ice bath and prevented this vigorous bubbling and potential fire hazard by limiting the rate of reaction an thus controlling the amount of heat produced at any given time (Clevenge and Kilway
Therefore, the melting point range supported the formation of the desired product because the experimental value obtained was relatively close to the theoretical value. The melting point for all of the reagents, products and solvents used in this experiment were much farther from this value than that of triphenylcarbinol and this supported the formation of the desired product because its values matched most closely with the data obtained. The reason that the melting point range was considerably wider and lower than the theoretical value was due to the presence of impurities in the sample. The data suggests that the sample was contaminated with another substance such as unreacted benzophenone, which has a melting point range from 47.0 °C – 49.0 °C, and may have caused the melting point to decrease and resulted in a broader range from the theoretical value. Therefore, although the melting point range obtained indicates that triphenylcarbinol was formed it also suggests that there were some impurities …show more content…
Ether which was the solution’s solvent has a relatively low boiling point, and a rapid increase in temperature may have increased the risk of fire and caused excessive bubbling. The slow addition of benzophenone allows the solution to gradually dissipate heat to the ice bath and prevented this vigorous bubbling and potential fire hazard by limiting the rate of reaction an thus controlling the amount of heat produced at any given time (Clevenge and Kilway