Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Synthesis of benzoic acid from benzyl alcohol
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Synthesis of benzoic acid from benzyl alcohol
We successfully achieved our goal of synthesizing benzhydrol, but we did not successfully reach the goals of the completion of the synthesis or purification of benzhydrol. It was clear that synthesis was of benzhydrol was taking place as the formation of the addition complex, which formed a white gunk, was present. Also, it was possible to tell the synthesis was occurring when the white gunk from the addition complex was consumed during the acid workup. During the extraction of the products there was two layers forming which also indicated that synthesis had occurred, and trace amount of white bits of product were found in the waste beaker which also indicated that synthesis occurred. Once reaching a constant mass after driving of the excess diethyl ether, the crude product had a mass of 0.327grams and a high percent yield of 97.8%. During the first TLC examination of the crude product it was found to have 3 spots on the plate, biphenyl, benzaldehyde, and benzhydrol with Rf values of 0.68, 0.36, and 0.10 respectively. It was expected to see benzhydrol, the product, and biphenyl, the impurity, on the plate, but the presence of benzaldehyde was telling that not all of the starting material had been consumed during …show more content…
After washing it out, and driving off any remaining pet ether with a water bath and reaching a constant mass, the purified product had a mass of 0.272grams. A second TLC was ran to determine if the product was now pure. The plate was found to have two spots for the pure product, benzhydrol and biphenyl with Rf values of 0.67 and 0.15 respectively. It expected to see only one spot if the product was pure, so by TLC it was able to be determined there was not purification of the benzhydrol product. The pure product had a 73.1% yield, but this does not accurately reflect the yield as there were still impurities in the pure
The percent yield of products that was calculated for this reaction was about 81.2%, fairly less pure than the previous product but still decently pure. A carbon NMR and H NMR were produced and used to identify the inequivalent carbons and hydrogens of the product. There were 9 constitutionally inequivalent carbons and potentially 4,5, or 6 constitutionally inequivalent hydrogens. On the H NMR there are 5 peaks, but at a closer inspection of the product, it seems there is only 4 constitutionally inequivalent hydrogens because of the symmetry held by the product and of this H’s. However, expansion of the peaks around the aromatic region on the NMR show 3 peaks, which was suppose to be only 2 peaks. In between the peaks is a peak from the solvent, xylene, that was used, which may account to for this discrepancy in the NMR. Furthermore, the product may have not been fully dissolved or was contaminated, leading to distortion (a splitting) of the peaks. The 2 peaks further down the spectrum were distinguished from two H’s, HF and HE, based off of shielding affects. The HF was closer to the O, so it experienced more of an up field shift than HE. On the C NMR, there are 9 constitutionally inequivalent carbons. A CNMR Peak Position for Typical Functional Group table was consulted to assign the carbons to their corresponding peaks. The carbonyl carbon, C1, is the farthest up field, while the carbons on the benzene ring are in the 120-140 ppm region. The sp3 hybridized carbon, C2 and C3, are the lowest on the spectrum. This reaction verifies the statement, ”Measurements have shown that while naphthalene and benzene both are considered especially stable due to their aromaticity, benzene is significantly more stable than naphthalene.” As seen in the reaction, the benzene ring is left untouched and only the naphthalene is involved in the reaction with maleic
The goal of this two week lab was to examine the stereochemistry of the oxidation-reduction interconversion of 4-tert-butylcyclohexanol and 4-tert-butylcyclohexanone. The purpose of first week was to explore the oxidation of an alcohol to a ketone and see how the reduction of the ketone will affect the stereoselectivity. The purpose of first week is to oxidize the alcohol, 4-tert-butylcyclohexanol, to ketone just so that it can be reduced back into the alcohol to see how OH will react. The purpose of second week was to reduce 4-tert-butylcyclohexanol from first week and determine the effect of the product's diastereoselectivity by performing reduction procedures using sodium borohydride The chemicals for this lab are sodium hypochlorite, 4-tert-butylcyclohexanone
2-ethyl-1,3-hexanediol. The molecular weight of this compound is 146.2g/mol. It is converted into 2-ethyl-1-hydroxyhexan-3-one. This compounds molecular weight is 144.2g/mol. This gives a theoretical yield of .63 grams. My actual yield was .42 grams. Therefore, my percent yield was 67%. This was one of my highest yields yet. I felt that this was a good yield because part of this experiment is an equilibrium reaction. Hypochlorite must be used in excess to push the reaction to the right. Also, there were better ways to do this experiment where higher yields could have been produced. For example PCC could have been used. However, because of its toxic properties, its use is restricted. The purpose of this experiment was to determine which of the 3 compounds was formed from the starting material. The third compound was the oxidation of both alcohols. This could not have been my product because of the results of my IR. I had a broad large absorption is the range of 3200 to 3500 wavenumbers. This indicates the presence of an alcohol. If my compound had been fully oxidized then there would be no such alcohol present. Also, because of my IR, I know that my compound was one of the other 2 compounds because of the strong sharp absorption at 1705 wavenumbers. This indicates the presence of a carbonyl. Also, my 2,4-DNP test was positive. Therefore I had to prove which of the two compounds my final product was. The first was the oxidation of the primary alcohol, forming an aldehyde and a secondary alcohol. This could not have been my product because the Tollen’s test. My test was negative indicating no such aldehyde. Also, the textbook states that aldehydes show 2 characteristic absorption’s in the range of 2720-2820 wavenumbers. No such absorption’s were present in my sample. Therefore my final product was the oxidation of the secondary alcohol. My final product had a primary alcohol and a secondary ketone
The theoretical weight was 599.6 mg. This yields a percent yield of 3.7%. Table 1 also illustrates the experimental melting point of 99.3-102.1◦C. A melting point that has a range larger than 3◦C is indicative of impurities in the sample. A few possibilities of impurities could have been unreacted norbornene, and water. Evidence that supports that there was unreacted norbornene in the final sample was the fact that the product was a jelly-like structure. Norbornene by itself has a jelly-like structure. However, once norbornene reacted with the acid-catalyst (H2O2), then it should have changed the chemical structure of the molecule and once the solution was brought back down to room temperature, crystals should have formed. Since a jelly-like, or oil-like product was present at the end of the reaction, then this is indicative that there was unreacted norbornene in the sample. The second impurity that may have been present in the final product was water. Instead of adding 3 mL of sodium bicarbonate and then 3 mL of brine, 3 mL of brine was added first and then 3 mL of sodium bicarbonate was added. This experimental error caused excess aqueous solution to be added to the diethyl ether. Since excess water was added to the final product, about 4x the amount of anhydrous sodium sulfate was needed in order to remove the water from the product. This was another indication that there was too much water in
As shown in figure 2, the percentage of each isomeric alcohol in the mixture had been determined. The hydrogen atom on the carbon atom with the hydroxyl group appear at around 4.0 ppm for borneol and 3.6 ppm for isoborneol. The product ratio has been determined by integrating the peaks. A ratio of 6:1 for the Isoborneol/borneol ratio was expected and is validated by the calculations shown above, with isoborneol percentage at 83.82% and 16.17% of borneol. A CHCl3 group noted at around 7ppm and a CH2Cl2 at around 3.5ppm.
Therefore, the gas chromatography could not be performed to determine its composition. The ratio of the three samples obtained, were not all accurate. The first sample, of pure hexane should have had a ratio close to 100% hexane to 0% heptane. The second ratio should have been close to 50% hexane to 50% heptane and the third should have been the reverse of the first sample, with 0% hexane to 100% heptane. The boiling point of hexane is around 65°C and the boiling point of Heptane is 100°C. The first sample’s error could have occurred due to the late extraction of the sample. When the boiling point was reached, the extraction of the sample from the distillation vial should have occurred immediately, not doing so caused some of the vapors from heptane to be included into the first sample. This could be prevented next time by lowering the heat of the Variac transformer, which would have allowed for the heating of the compound to be slower than what it was
What were we trying to accomplish with this experiment? What method did we implement to accomplish the task? What techniques were used to purify and identify the product(s) of the reaction?
The percentage yield gained was 70% from the Fischer Esterification reaction, which evaluates to be a good production of yield produced as the reaction is known to be reversible where conditions such as the concentration of the reactants, pressure and temperature could affect the extent of the reaction from performing. These white crystalline crystals were tested for impurity by conducting a melting point analysis and taking spectrospic data such as the IR spectra, HNMR and CNMR to confirm the identification of the product. These spectrospic methods and melting point analysis confirmed the white crystalline crystals were benzocaine.
As a final point, the unknown secondary alcohol α-methyl-2-naphthalenemethanol had the R-configuration since it reacted the fastest with S-HBTM and much slower with R-HBTM. TLC was a qualitative method and ImageJ served as a quantitative method for determining which reaction was the faster esterification. Finally, 1H NMR assisted in identifying the unknown from a finite list of possible alcohols by labeling the hydrogens to the corresponding peaks.
Reacting 1-butanol produced 2-trans-butene as the major product. 1-butanol produces three different products instead of the predicted one because of carbocation rearrangement. Because of the presence of a strong acid this reaction will undergo E1 Saytzeff, which produces the more substituted
The spots moved 3.8cm, 2.3cm, 2.1cm, 1.8cm, and 2.5 cm, for the methyl benzoate, crude product, mother liquor, recrystallized product, and isomeric mixture, respectively. The Rf values were determined to be.475,.2875,.2625,.225, and.3125, for the methyl benzoate, crude product, mother liquor, recrystallized product, and isomeric mixture, respectively. Electron releasing groups (ERG) activate electrophilic substitution, and make the ortho and para positions negative, and are called ortho para directors. In these reactions, the ortho and para products will be created in a much greater abundance. Electron Withdrawing groups (EWG) make the ortho and para positions positive.
In a small reaction tube, the tetraphenylcyclopentadienone (0.110 g, 0.28 mmol) was added into the dimethyl acetylene dicarboxylate (0.1 mL) and nitrobenzene (1 mL) along with a boiling stick. The color of the mixed solution was purple. The solution was then heated to reflux until it turned into a tan color. After the color change has occurred, ethanol (3 mL) was stirred into the small reaction tube. After that, the small reaction tube was placed in an ice bath until the solid was formed at the bottom of the tube. Then, the solution with the precipitate was filtered through vacuum filtration and washed with ethanol. The precipitate then was dried and weighed. The final product was dimethyl tertraphenylpthalate (0.086 g, 0.172mmol, 61.42%).
This experiment synthesized luminol (5-Amino-2,3-dihydro-1,4-phthalazinedione) and used the product to observe how chemiluminescence would work. The starting material was 5-nitro-2,3-dihydrophthalazine-1,4-dione, which was, after addition of reaction agents, refluxed and vacuum filtered to retrieve luminol. Using two stock solutions, we missed our precipitated luminol with sodium hydroxide, potassium ferricyanide, and hydrogen peroxide, in their respective solutions, in a dark room, to observe the blue light
In this lab, it was determined how the rate of an enzyme-catalyzed reaction is affected by physical factors such as enzyme concentration, temperature, and substrate concentration affect. The question of what factors influence enzyme activity can be answered by the results of peroxidase activity and its relation to temperature and whether or not hydroxylamine causes a reaction change with enzyme activity. An enzyme is a protein produced by a living organism that serves as a biological catalyst. A catalyst is a substance that speeds up the rate of a chemical reaction and does so by lowering the activation energy of a reaction. With that energy reactants are brought together so that products can be formed.
After the some time, we filter it through a Büchner funnel before it is recrystallized and filtered again. The mass was recorded as it was dry. By adding sodium carbonate, we will now test whether what obtained is benzoic acid or not, because one can observe bobbles if it is an acid. After that we burn it to test if it is aromatic.