Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Attn. Spidey.....pwder conversion question?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Attn. Spidey.....pwder conversion question?

    I am wondering if anyone has visited Basskillers site on chemical conversons. Very good info. on there, however, i have a question relating to the volumes in the powder conversons? For example, his first conversion is 5 G of t-enanthate====250mg/ml 20ml.
    But the oil volume is stated as 15.25 ml and the BA is only 1 ml....so this might sound stupid but that only adds up to 16.25 ml? Does the addition of 5 grams of powder add to the volume, if yes how much volume does 5G of powder enanthate add.
    Or do you just add extra oil to the final product?

  • #2
    I guess we need to know the density of the powder? Can we measure this by adding 1 gram of powder to a fixed volume of liquid....then divide the weight of the powder by the volume change in the soluton to give a X g/ml measurement?

    Comment


    • #3
      It's a little more complicated then that actually. Yes, the powder makes up some of the volume. You don't need the density though. That could only be used if the powder was completely insoluble. What you need to know to calculate the volume is something called the delta-V of mixing. That will be a little different for each different powder but I have seen it approximated as 0.8; i.e 1g powder takes up 0.8mL when dissolved.

      Using that number as a guestimate, 5g powder takes up 4mL to bring the total volume to 20.25mL.

      The BB and BA also have delta-V's of mixing. 1mL BA + 1mL oil does not equal exactly 2mL. It will be either a little less or a little more depending on whether the delta-V is positive or negative.

      To be totally accurate, you would need to mix everything up and then measure the total volume of solution.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanx Spidey, that totally makes sense! I should have went into Chemical enginering instead of structural engineering.....it's so much more interesting!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by GATOR
          Thanx Spidey, that totally makes sense! I should have went into Chemical enginering instead of structural engineering.....it's so much more interesting!

          I'm in Chemical Engr. :D , not dealing much with this type of info. however. It's a lot more about Plant and Mill type stuff. What you should have went into is Synthetic Organic Chemistry like someone else around here......

          Comment


          • #6
            True, LMG.

            Don't you find you get some new respect when you're supporting 19" guns and a brain? HA! HA!

            Comment

            Working...
            X