Maybe I'll get a UTFSE for xmas this year. Come to think about it, Ive never gotten one of those
Wizardx...I'm no wizard when it comes to mols and such but could you or another educated bee share the ratio's for making HI in the 55-57% as it applies to this thread and rxn.
More precisely, the amount of dh2o in relation to the other precursors.
Geez...you are correct and had I taken the time you did, I would have come out armed with the same observation instead of the undersite. I just looked at the first set of ratios
However...the Wareratio for dh2o still stands at .5ml per 1gE for 30hr+ and .8ml per 1gE for 48hr.
With that amount, Ibee wouldn't have set his mindseye on anything but 48hours @ 100°C. And he'd have also followed his own SOP and added 13.3ml instead of 16.5ml
Ibee has used excess dh2o in the past and it's similar to all those reports of accidental dh2o addition.
The only way to recover was cooking it off.
It doesn't take much dh2o over the point of creating HI to quench or stall the rxn for a time until that dh2o comes back down to allow the recycling to start again.
Dragan's ratio's fell just between the wareratio and the geezratio
And I'm sure geez will agree with ware that nothing should come off before 30hr in order for it to be considered a LWR.
It's hard to spin bees around toward that longercook mindset but for the sake of consistancy and naming conventions anything less (time or hydration-wise) than a LWR is a
?
Older nano write-ups(p/p type) called for less than .5ml dh2o(6-10drops) for the whole shebang.
Now bees are beeing asked to drop 10-20 dh2o drops per gram of E.
I say 20drops per gram of e is too much for the standard LWR precursor ratios selected.
Staying under as SWIG suggests at .8ml dh2o per gram E keeps it in the ballpark of success but only by following the same constraints that apply to an overly hydrated rxn.
Cook Longer!
IMHO
