What are the fine particles in the filtrate after recrystallization?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jacksie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chemistry Lab
AI Thread Summary
The fine colorless particles observed in the filtrate after recrystallization are likely either small crystals of phthalic acid that passed through the filter or impurities from the original solid. These particles may have formed due to the solution being saturated, leading to precipitation during cooling or evaporation. The presence of these particles could negatively impact the yield of the purified solid, as they may contribute to an inaccurate measurement of the final product. Understanding their origin is crucial for improving the recrystallization process. Overall, addressing these fine particles is essential for achieving reliable experimental results.
jacksie
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
After performing crystallization and melting point determination I determined that my unknown solid was phthalic acid, however I am left with the question:
At the end of the filtration of the purified solid, it was observed that a small quantity of fine colourless particles was contained in the filtrate that had been collected in a clean filtration flask. (vacuum filtration to separate crystals from solvent).
i) What were these particles?
ii) Explain why these particles formed in the filtrate.
iii) Explain what effect, if any, the formation of these particles might have on the experimental results.


I am thinking that these particles were either crystals that were so small that they passed through the filter, and this would then affect the experimental results as the yeld would be less, or that these are impurities, but if they are I am not sure why they would form in the filtrate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Filtrate is a saturated solution. Under vacuum it was most likely partially evaporated, and cooled in the process.

--
methods
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top