These chemicals were mixed and ventilated, similarly to the first time mixing the liquids. The flask was set down so the liquid layers could separate. The bottom layer was transferred to an empty flask. The same steps were repeated with another 3 mL of 3M NaOH into the diethyl ether. The 6 mL of 3M NaOH is inside of a new flask and 3 mL of 6M HCl was added to it. The solution sat in an ice bath for fifteen minutes and no solids were being produced. The PH test strips showed that the basic solution turned acidic. After letting it sit out for a little bit more and still not seeing any solids being produced, the solution was dumped in organic waste. 1.5 mL of distilled water was added to the 25-mL flask with diethyl ether inside of it. The bottom layer was pipetted out of the flask and transferred to an empty flask. 450 mg of anhydrous granular sodium sulfate were added to the wet ether to absorb any water in it. Then the ether was again transferred to a large test tube. Another 1.5 mL of diethyl ether were added to the flask with to the anhydrous granular sodium sulfate and was transferred to the large test tube with the either inside. The large test tube with the diethyl ether sat open for a few days so that the ether would evaporate and that a solid white substance would be left in the large test tube to be weighed and record it melting …show more content…
One of the two substances that was in the envelope was acetanilide. Substance 2 was the acetanilide because it had similar melting points. The literature value of acetanilide is around 114.3 C° 2 and the melting point that was recorded was between 113.0 C° and 114.0 C°. Another reason why it is acetanilide is because it is the neutral substance that was left over when the diethyl ether evaporated. With the data showing that there is no melting point depression, melting point width, and the color of acetanilide being neutral white helps estimate that the substance was pure. However, the percent recovery of acetanilide was only 12