Corante

About this Author
DBL%20Hendrix%20small.png College chemistry, 1983

Derek Lowe The 2002 Model

Dbl%20new%20portrait%20B%26W.png After 10 years of blogging. . .

Derek Lowe, an Arkansan by birth, got his BA from Hendrix College and his PhD in organic chemistry from Duke before spending time in Germany on a Humboldt Fellowship on his post-doc. He's worked for several major pharmaceutical companies since 1989 on drug discovery projects against schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, diabetes, osteoporosis and other diseases. To contact Derek email him directly: derekb.lowe@gmail.com Twitter: Dereklowe

Chemistry and Drug Data: Drugbank
Emolecules
ChemSpider
Chempedia Lab
Synthetic Pages
Organic Chemistry Portal
PubChem
Not Voodoo
DailyMed
Druglib
Clinicaltrials.gov

Chemistry and Pharma Blogs:
Org Prep Daily
The Haystack
Kilomentor
A New Merck, Reviewed
Liberal Arts Chemistry
Electron Pusher
All Things Metathesis
C&E News Blogs
Chemiotics II
Chemical Space
Noel O'Blog
In Vivo Blog
Terra Sigilatta
BBSRC/Douglas Kell
ChemBark
Realizations in Biostatistics
Chemjobber
Pharmalot
ChemSpider Blog
Pharmagossip
Med-Chemist
Organic Chem - Education & Industry
Pharma Strategy Blog
No Name No Slogan
Practical Fragments
SimBioSys
The Curious Wavefunction
Natural Product Man
Fragment Literature
Chemistry World Blog
Synthetic Nature
Chemistry Blog
Synthesizing Ideas
Business|Bytes|Genes|Molecules
Eye on FDA
Chemical Forums
Depth-First
Symyx Blog
Sceptical Chymist
Lamentations on Chemistry
Computational Organic Chemistry
Mining Drugs
Henry Rzepa


Science Blogs and News:
Bad Science
The Loom
Uncertain Principles
Fierce Biotech
Blogs for Industry
Omics! Omics!
Young Female Scientist
Notional Slurry
Nobel Intent
SciTech Daily
Science Blog
FuturePundit
Aetiology
Gene Expression (I)
Gene Expression (II)
Sciencebase
Pharyngula
Adventures in Ethics and Science
Transterrestrial Musings
Slashdot Science
Cosmic Variance
Biology News Net


Medical Blogs
DB's Medical Rants
Science-Based Medicine
GruntDoc
Respectful Insolence
Diabetes Mine


Economics and Business
Marginal Revolution
The Volokh Conspiracy
Knowledge Problem


Politics / Current Events
Virginia Postrel
Instapundit
Belmont Club
Mickey Kaus


Belles Lettres
Uncouth Reflections
Arts and Letters Daily
In the Pipeline: Don't miss Derek Lowe's excellent commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry in general at In the Pipeline

In the Pipeline

« More On Merck and Taranabant | Main | Antidepressants: Depressing News or Not? »

February 26, 2008

Sand Won't Save You This Time

Email This Entry

Posted by Derek

In a comment to my post on putting out fires last week, one commenter mentioned the utility of the good old sand bucket, and wondered if there was anything that would go on to set the sand on fire. Thanks to a note from reader Robert L., I can report that there is indeed such a reagent: chlorine trifluoride.

I have not encountered this fine substance myself, but reading up on its properties immediately gives it a spot on my “no way, no how” list. Let's put it this way: during World War II, the Germans were very interested in using it in self-igniting flamethrowers, but found it too nasty to work with. It is apparently about the most vigorous fluorinating agent known, and is much more difficult to handle than fluorine gas. That’s one of those statements you don’t get to hear very often, and it should be enough to make any sensible chemist turn around smartly and head down the hall in the other direction.

The compound also a stronger oxidizing agent than oxygen itself, which also puts it into rare territory. That means that it can potentially go on to “burn” things that you would normally consider already burnt to hell and gone, and a practical consequence of that is that it’ll start roaring reactions with things like bricks and asbestos tile. It’s been used in the semiconductor industry to clean oxides off of surfaces, at which activity it no doubt excels.

There’s a report from the early 1950s (in this PDF) of a one-ton spill of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath, completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever forgot. That process, I should add, would necessarily have been accompanied by copious amounts of horribly toxic and corrosive by-products: it’s bad enough when your reagent ignites wet sand, but the clouds of hot hydrofluoric acid are your special door prize if you’re foolhardy enough to hang around and watch the fireworks.

I’ll let the late John Clark describe the stuff, since he had first-hand experience in attempts to use it as rocket fuel. From his out-of-print classic Ignition! we have:

”It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been measured. It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and water-with which it reacts explosively. It can be kept in some of the ordinary structural metals-steel, copper, aluminium, etc.-because of the formation of a thin film of insoluble metal fluoride which protects the bulk of the metal, just as the invisible coat of oxide on aluminium keeps it from burning up in the atmosphere. If, however, this coat is melted or scrubbed off, and has no chance to reform, the operator is confronted with the problem of coping with a metal-fluorine fire. For dealing with this situation, I have always recommended a good pair of running shoes.”

Sound advice, indeed. I'll be lacing mine up if anyone tries to bring the stuff into my lab.

Comments (79) + TrackBacks (0) | Category: Things I Won't Work With


COMMENTS

1. Fred on February 26, 2008 11:25 AM writes...

Everyone should have a “no way, no how” list.

Permalink to Comment

2. Thomas McEntee on February 26, 2008 11:57 AM writes...

According to the Kirk-Other Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 4th Ed, during WWII, Germany ran a 5-ton per day pilot plant to produce ClF3. Chlorine trifluoride oxide (ClF3O) is another extremely powerful oxidative fluorinator. The initial report on its synthesis was published in 1970; this report describes the UV-initiated reaction chlorine trifluoride with oxygen and fluorine. Another is chlorine trifluoride dioxide (ClF3O2, first synthesized in 1972. A key paper to read regarding oxidative fluorinators--including the xenon fluorides and krypton difluoride--is the study "A Quantitiative Scale for the Oxidizing Strength of Oxidative Fluorinators", Karl O. Christie and David A. Dixon, JACS, 114, 2978-85 (1992)

Permalink to Comment

3. Feiser N. Feiser on February 26, 2008 12:22 PM writes...

Ah, the old sand bucket. Was out in the hall outside the undergraduate labs. Might have been there since benzene was linear. Top was decorated with cigarette butts, dried gum, bits of paper. Then one day down the hall the THF still is being cleaned out - long over due. Thick clumps of whatever ketyl becomes. Inside, a bright shiny prize of sodium metal that disagrees with the optimistic and impatient grad student's use of straight ethanol as cleaning aid. Fire erupts. Extinguished by CO2. Humid day, icy glass, beads of water form and follow gravity down. Into and onto sodium metal. Fire erupts. Extinguished by CO2. Repeat several times until it dawns that CO2 will eventually run out. Send terrified lab mate down the hall to fetch savior: sand bucket! Weight of bucket: about 200 lbs. Skinny grad student risks hernia rushing it back to lab, arrives exhausted, collapses in victory like Pheidippides. Firefighting grad student drops damned CO2 tank, plunges bare hand into sand bucket. Screams in pain - sand has been accreted by age into protoconcrete, impermeable to human flesh, spatulae, metal rulers, etc. Fire meanwhile burns itself out. Sand bucket replaced for next sucker.

Permalink to Comment

4. jose on February 26, 2008 12:50 PM writes...

"I am become death, the (liquid) destroyer of worlds."

Permalink to Comment

5. Mark on February 26, 2008 12:55 PM writes...

Feiser,

That made my morning! What a fine combination of chemistry, history, and comedy.

I get the soundtrack to an old Stooges short in my head when reading that...

Permalink to Comment

6. Wavefunction on February 26, 2008 1:27 PM writes...

"Ignition" totally rocks! What a rambunctious journey through liquid rocket fuel propellants. Too bad it's out of print.

Permalink to Comment

7. Brooks Moses on February 26, 2008 2:54 PM writes...

It does sound like a book that I'd really like to read. It would be nice if Dover would find a slot for it in their reprint catalog!

Permalink to Comment

8. BACE on February 26, 2008 3:51 PM writes...

On a different note, what do you think of this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/15/business/15drug.html?ex=1297659600&en=62aabaec5acffa8c&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

People will die from paying the cost, not of the disease.

Permalink to Comment

9. In the back stacks on February 26, 2008 5:36 PM writes...

get yer ignition here

http://wwwlib.umi.com/bod/fullcite?id=148917

Permalink to Comment

10. milkshake on February 26, 2008 7:26 PM writes...

I was in lab where they analysed oxygen isotopic content in silicates and other minerals.

They had a big tank of BrF3 there. It made an impression on me - you take dry sand and gas it with brominefluoride and off goes O2

Oh, and the apparatus was a benchtop, the tank parked right next to it. it had an exhaust but no fume hood in sight :)

Permalink to Comment

11. Fred on February 26, 2008 7:46 PM writes...

Interesting that this should show up on a day we are discussing difficult fires: Ethanol fires from rail and tanker accidents are more difficult to extinguish than gasoline fires. Ethanol dissolves the foam commonly used to fight fires.

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/n/content/shared-gen/ap/National/Ethanol_Fires.html

Permalink to Comment

12. Anonymous BMS Researcher on February 27, 2008 9:00 AM writes...


When my father was in high school some fellow students started a thermite reaction in the chem lab. It burned its way through several floors and finally went quite a ways into the concrete floor of the basement (from my father's descriptions I'm visualizing the scene in Alien when the creature's blood burns through the decks of the spacecraft). Fortunately, no people happened to be directly in its path...

Permalink to Comment

13. tom bartlett on February 27, 2008 9:50 AM writes...

"When my father was in high school some fellow students started a thermite reaction in the chem lab. It burned its way through several floors and finally went quite a ways into the concrete floor of the basement"

Must have been a pretty big quantity.

Anyway, ClF3 sounds way cool. Xenon Fluorides are also good candidates for the "no way, No how" list.

Permalink to Comment

14. milkshake on February 28, 2008 1:09 AM writes...

XeF2 is actually a nicely behaved heavy salt-like solid, not very reactive. You can but it from Aldrich but it is dear.

Permalink to Comment

15. TNC on February 28, 2008 2:52 AM writes...

Baran actually used XeF2 in a recent synthesis.

Permalink to Comment

16. Thomas McEntee on February 28, 2008 6:45 AM writes...

Milkshake: As of January 2005, XeF2 also was offered for sale on the English-language web site of Russia's Kurchatov Institute and recommended for uses in the surface treatment and improving wear-resistance for styrene-butadiene rubbers, acrylonitile-based rubbers, EPDM and isoprene-based rubbers.

An interesting synthesis of XeF2 suitable for students was described by JH Holloway in 1966 (J Chem Ed) in which a sealed Pyrex bulb containing fluorine and xenon is placed in sunlight. After a period, tiny crystals of XeF2 are observed to form.

Permalink to Comment

17. A-nony-muse on February 28, 2008 9:39 AM writes...

What, no one chose to comment on the burning RAW CHICKEN FLESH pics in the Air Products MSDS for ClF3??? That's not something you see every day!

Permalink to Comment

18. Derek Lowe on February 28, 2008 9:41 AM writes...

I've used XeF2 myself - a rather penetrating smell, which I sampled despite trying not to. It's the higher xenon fluorides, I believe, that are a bit rambunctious. I'll probably add them to the list, too, and do a post on 'em. . .

Permalink to Comment

19. MedChemSF on February 28, 2008 12:08 PM writes...

A-nony-muse: I was more impressed with the flaming nitrile glove.

I can imagine chicken on fire, but I don't think I've ever thought about what it would take for a chemical to set my gloves off.

Permalink to Comment

20. Kevin on March 3, 2008 1:59 PM writes...

I hate to admit it but I've worked with both. I've even seen someone redesign a TGA to handle these gases. Funny, thro the HS2 worried me more.

Catalyst design can be messy at times.

Permalink to Comment

21. Mike on March 3, 2008 2:18 PM writes...

Careful. You are going to give the Truthers another idea about how the government brought down the WTC towers, WTC 7, and what really caused the Tunguska blast.

Permalink to Comment

22. Jim on March 3, 2008 2:19 PM writes...

Reminds me of a Captain Marvel comic book story from (probably) the late 1940s where Captain Marvel was fighting some evil genius who had created a universal solvent. This chlorine trifluoride sure sounds almost as scary.

Permalink to Comment

23. MB on March 3, 2008 2:33 PM writes...

The Nazis also experimented with loading chlorine trifluoride into artillery shells to use against the Maginot fortifications. One of those babies slamming into your pillbox could ruin your whole day.

Permalink to Comment

24. Huycbald on March 3, 2008 3:44 PM writes...

I just love it that there are people in the world who can answer the question, "Will anything set sand on fire?" And, in the affirmative, no less.

Great stuff!

Permalink to Comment

25. Douglas Pratt on March 3, 2008 5:56 PM writes...

I have a beloved copy of "Ignition!" right here. Did y'all know that Dr. Clark was a well-known member of the Baker Street Irregulars? He wrote the famous essay "Watson was a Woman," offering proof that Dr. Watson was really Irene Adler. A truly amazing man. The introduction to "Ignition!" was written by Isaac Asimov. By the way, in the chapter where he discusses chlorine triflouride, Clarke mentions that someone nanaged to synthesize enough chlorine pentaflouride (!) to characterize...

Permalink to Comment

26. Robert on March 4, 2008 9:10 AM writes...

I just found your site, and I have to say that these "Things I Won't Work With" segments are both hilarious and informative. I'm a cheist myself, though most of my work has been quality control with analytical instruments, so I'm not familiar with all the reagents and processes being mentioned. But I'm certainly learning interesting new things by looking them up. (Not to mention leanring what to stay the hell away from!) Anyway, I hope you keep up with these. you've certainly earned a bookmark from me!

Permalink to Comment

27. Clayton E. Cramer on March 4, 2008 4:13 PM writes...

This brings back memories of sitting on an airliner talking to a sales engineer for a chemical company. He was completely unaware of what happens when you combine fluorine gas and water. Yikes!

Permalink to Comment

28. Bob Holness on March 10, 2008 9:51 AM writes...

So in this case we need a metal filing bucket?

Permalink to Comment

29. SFOtter on March 10, 2008 3:19 PM writes...

Years back, when I worked as a machinist, we occasionally had to mill blocks of magnesium for semi-conductor mfgs.

Some apprentice decided he could cut faster than the programmer had set and ratcheted up the speed & feed rate.

The resulting fire destroyed a $40k Matsuraa mill and part of the floor.

Permalink to Comment

30. Irritant on March 20, 2008 2:03 AM writes...

I believe this is what Chuck Norris has for breakfast when he has a sore throat.

Permalink to Comment

31. Spooge on June 28, 2008 10:22 PM writes...

The first reagent in the Krol Blade.

Permalink to Comment

32. Chunkstyle on July 14, 2008 10:12 PM writes...

As I recall, ClF3 was simply dropped on London by those same Nazis, who built the 5 ton/day plant for it. Pretty nasty, when the compound itself is the bomb...

Permalink to Comment

33. Seriously on September 26, 2008 2:38 PM writes...

I've worked with ClF3 before, had excellent results with maintaining LP-CVD process chamber and no accidents when handled properly. Get careless and you can get burned. Handle with respect, and the benefits are miraculous.

Permalink to Comment

34. Rissa on October 24, 2008 6:16 PM writes...

"Suitable extinguishing media: None."

Says it all really.

Permalink to Comment

35. Yanes on January 28, 2009 1:10 PM writes...

We use bromine triflouride in the the oilfield, nasty similar oxidizer. Pretty potent mental image: burning snow.

Permalink to Comment

36. Eric on March 18, 2009 11:39 AM writes...

How, pray tell, did they figure out that ClF3 is toxic? I mean, besides the whole catching-fire-to-raw-flesh-or-water thing.

Permalink to Comment

37. Ilya on March 22, 2009 4:53 AM writes...

So this is the stuff that aliens (from the film) had for blood...

Permalink to Comment

38. Michael Chermside on March 25, 2009 3:56 PM writes...

How on earth do you synthesize that stuff?! Not that I'd want to try...

Permalink to Comment

39. milkshake on March 25, 2009 6:06 PM writes...

obviously they had to find some material that does not get eaten by it. I suppose they used some metal alloy that coats itself with a protective layer of fluoride. The starting material, fluorine gas is bad enough - on contact it speedily burns through the skin like a flame...

By the way Teflon was invented in WWII as the only material that can withstand uranium hexafluoride in the gas diffusion enrichment plant.

Permalink to Comment

40. anonymous on March 26, 2009 12:16 AM writes...

#36 Eric- I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_human_experimentation

Permalink to Comment

41. Ariel on March 26, 2009 3:40 AM writes...

@milkshake: No it wasn't. That's simply not true about teflon. First uranium hexafluoride is not that reactive, second teflon was invented by 3M much later than that.

Permalink to Comment

42. Anonymous on March 26, 2009 9:51 AM writes...

RE #39 and #41

US Patent No. US 2,230,654
Title Tetrafluoroethylene polymers
Publication date February 4, 1941
Inventor Roy J. Plunkett
Applicant KINETIC CHEMICALS INC Wilmington, DE


Permalink to Comment

43. milkshake on March 26, 2009 9:27 PM writes...

UF6 is nasty to most organics. From what I heard they had a major problem with finding the right material for the seals. Also to keep the moving parts from seizing (such as inside the valves) the conventional petroleum-based lubricants could not be used. Eventually they developed perfluoro polymer compositions specifically for the Oak Ridge plant.

Permalink to Comment

44. Luke on April 9, 2009 8:56 AM writes...


Apparently ClF3 has many industrial uses in reactions which would normally require elemental fluorine, simply because it's easier to liquefy and handle as a liquid than fluorine - and I suppose it's not any scarier than bulk liquid fluorine.

It's an interesting material, but I agree, I don't know that I'd work with it.

Permalink to Comment

45. Rick on June 29, 2009 9:41 PM writes...

Hello Derek,

What a fantastic posting. I'm sending it to all my friends in the hazardous response community! I ran a fluorine facility for 5 years, and was really glad to move onto my next assignment. Keep up the good work. May I post a link to you on my blog?

Permalink to Comment

46. Gavin on July 20, 2009 2:28 PM writes...

#39 #41 and #42

PTFE was discovered accidentally in 1938 by a young scientist looking for something else. Roy Plunkett was a chemist for E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (Du Pont). He had earned a PhD from Ohio State University in 1936, and in 1938 when he stumbled upon Teflon, he was still only 27 years old. Plunkett's area was refrigerants. Many chemicals that were used as refrigerants before the 1930s were dangerously explosive. Du Pont and General Motors had developed a new type of non-flammable refrigerant, a form of Freon called refrigerant 114. Refrigerant 114 was tied up in an exclusive arrangement with General Motor's Frigidaire division, and at the time could not be marketed to other manufacturers. Plunkett endeavored to come up with a different form of refrigerant 114 that would get around Frigidaire's patent control. The technical name for refrigerant 114 was tetrafluorodichloroethane. Plunkett hoped to make a similar refrigerant by reacting hydrochloric acid with a compound called tetrafluoroethylene, or TFE. TFE itself was a little known substance, and Plunkett decided his first task was to make a large amount of this gas. The chemist thought he might as well make a hundred pounds of the gas, to be sure to have enough for all his chemical tests, and for toxicological tests as well. He stored the gas in metal cans with a valve release, much like the cans used commercially today for pressurized sprays like hair spray. Plunkett kept the cans on dry ice, to cool and liquefy the TFE gas. His refrigerant experiment required Plunkett and his assistant to release the TFE gas from the cans into a heated chamber. On the morning of April 6, 1938, Plunkett found he could not get the gas out of the can. To Plunkett and his assistant's mystification, the gas had transformed overnight into a white, flaky powder. The TFE had polymerized.

Permalink to Comment

47. AO on October 2, 2009 7:51 PM writes...

Contrary to being the nigh on uncontainable monster suggested by your amusing blog entry this MSDS suggests dry powder and CO2 are suitable extinguishing media.

http://encyclopedia.airliquide.com/sds/en/024_AL_EN.pdf

In the event of eye contact, it also suggests washing with water?!

Permalink to Comment

48. sdancer on October 14, 2009 3:46 AM writes...

In the event of eye contact, it's almost always water, since whatever entered the eye is pretty sure to have reacted with water, salt, fat, and proteins already in the worst possible way (in the case of ClF3, that sounds like a lot of "worst") and needs to be washed out. The rinsing procedure is based on the same concept as the production of homeopathic medicine: dilute until it's gone. That is also reflected by the suggested rinsing for at least 15 minutes. I guess further treatment would involve calcium to get rid of the HFl.

I find the measure noted for ingestion quite nice, however...

Permalink to Comment

49. JWC on November 21, 2009 2:33 PM writes...

It may interest you to know, Mr. Lowe, that not only this particular article but your entire "Things I won't work with" list has made the cut for my own personal Internet Archive.

Now to get my hands on that book...

Permalink to Comment

50. altin çilek form seti on January 26, 2011 12:33 PM writes...

In the event of eye contact, it's almost always water, since whatever entered the eye is pretty sure to have reacted with water, salt, fat, and proteins already in the worst possible way (in the case of ClF3, that sounds like a lot of "worst") and needs to be washed out. The rinsing procedure is based on the same concept as the production of homeopathic medicine: dilute until it's gone. That is also reflected by the suggested rinsing for at least 15 minutes. I guess further treatment would involve calcium to get rid of the HFl.

I find the measure noted for ingestion quite nice, however...

Permalink to Comment

51. Anon on April 6, 2011 6:00 AM writes...

****ing hell, one more thing to keep normal folk such as myself restricted access to.

Permalink to Comment

53. ST on July 1, 2011 9:02 PM writes...

I've worked with both UF6 and ClF3(among other things equally dangerous). UF6 does not scare me one bit. Reactive?...maybe over time, but not near what ClF3 can do. When I worked with ClF3 we processed(neutralized) over 18,000 lbs of the stuff out of ton cylinders in about 2 months using 3000 gallon reactors. We ran a few experiments(off the books) with it and I about wet my trelleborg level B suit just from dropping one drop of the stuff into a 5 gallon bucket of water. Sounded the equivalent of an M-80 firecracker with just a drop. Not to mention that the stuff is a calcium seeker which will dissolve your bones from the inside out with the only thing in your arsenal to stop it being a tube of calcium gluconate...and that's just a distraction for it. Very very interesting stuff.

Permalink to Comment

54. MZ on July 26, 2011 9:57 AM writes...

Working at the Minkwitz group in the late 80s / early 90s a lot of us, the Diploma and PhD students, were working with strong Fluorine or Oxygen based oxidizers or Lewis acids/bases. Water-free liquid HF was very often the only solvent that reasonably worked and inert atmospheres, very high integrity reactors and low temperatures were mandatory to control most reactions.
ClF3 is a given nasty component and earned deservedly its reputation, but other things like ClF and KrF2 are not too friendly either - all of us had to become experts in material science for vessels, reactors, high-integrity connections and valves / valves seats in addition to become conclude our studies as unharmed inorganic chemists.

In this forum, ST has made very valuable comments about the bulk/commodity use of such oxidizers - I value and appreciate them very much, good stuff.
As part of the "Fluorine for the Atomic Age" program of the glorious 1950s and 1960s, Air Products and Allied Chemical had 18-wheel road tankers with 30.000L tank capacities to transport liquified Fluorine and Chlorine Trifluoride on American highways around the country to the various application sites (a friend of mine has a 16-page color brochure of that!). Imagine a road collision with another gasoline-loaded 18-wheeler... ;-)
Any Uranium enrichment plant, e.g. former Allied Signal (Chemical), Honeywell, Areva/Comurhex, etc. are using massive quantities of the above chemicals for direct fluorination of UF4 and/or reactor, diffusion membrane or centrifuge in-situ clean.
In Asia - spec. Japan, large quantities (virtually hundreds) of 20kg ClF3 cabinets are installed in Semiconductor fabs for in-situ between-run cleans of Silicon or Tungsten CVD or VPE tools. They train people to handle the stuff, keep users alert and install the necessary safety equipment.

For further application reference of Fluorine-based chemistry, please search for the publications ("(Ten years of) Inorganic Halogen Oxidizer Research" - 1.400 pages) of Karl Otto Christe, a retired professor at USC in LA. He is what I call the best reference you can have in respectful handling of a huge number of extremely reactive components. Or, in other words "The Fluorine God" if you want to call him so - which he would be the first to decline that title, as he is such an understatement person.
There are too many to mention or honor in this research (Ruff, Schmeisser, Haas, Appelman, the Wilsons, Olah, Kornath, Naumann, Klapoetke, oooff...), but I tried to add my little piece to this puzzle - so just search the Internet for more if you wish...

Oh, nearly forgot - if you feel the urgent desire to go and try making and handling ClF3 yourself - just go to the G. Brauer's HANDBOOK OF PREPARATIVE INORGANIC CHEMISTRY, 1st Ed. 1961, p. 155. Just watch your back in the lab - and even more, your front...

...and don't forget what Calvin said to Hobbes: "Technological Progress goes Boink..." :-))

Just keep it a "Boink" and try to avoid the "Bang" (lab) or "Boooom" (industry)...

Permalink to Comment

55. bio merhem on August 2, 2011 8:58 AM writes...

In the event of eye contact, it's almost always water, since whatever entered the eye is pretty sure to have reacted with water, salt, fat, and proteins already in the worst possible way (in the case of ClF3, that sounds like a lot of "worst") and needs to be washed out. The rinsing procedure is based on the same concept as the production of homeopathic medicine: dilute until it's gone. That is also reflected by the suggested rinsing for at least 15 minutes. I guess further treatment would involve calcium to get rid of the HFl.

I find the measure noted for ingestion quite nice, however...

Permalink to Comment

56. Cave Johnson on September 8, 2011 2:06 AM writes...

We're done here.

Permalink to Comment

57. abadidea on October 5, 2011 11:47 AM writes...

Comment #56: The internet's done here. You won.

Permalink to Comment

58. Health Cover on December 8, 2011 3:11 AM writes...

Ignition! is such a good read, I remember reading it when I was still in the university and I totally enjoyed it. It is full of interesting stuff and it made me want to try out different things and be more adventurous in life.

Permalink to Comment

59. fbartho on July 16, 2012 6:03 PM writes...

Unfortunately, the safetygram PDF (from the article) with the store of the fire, appears to be broken.

Anyone have an updated link to that story?

Permalink to Comment

60. David Marjanović on July 31, 2012 11:04 AM writes...

The link is indeed broken. The file "cannot be found" and may have been "deleted, renamed, or" be "temporarily unavailable".

Permalink to Comment

61. Mazoola on September 29, 2012 11:54 PM writes...

re #59 & #60

safetygram39.pdf

Permalink to Comment

62. Colin on April 1, 2013 5:24 PM writes...

Thanks for the article.

Ignition! also mentions that a stream of liquid ClF3 dissolves Teflon like sugar in hot water. I'd call this the most alarming compound ever, but they also made ClF5 and a mixture of what they called Hydrazoid P, which would burn quietly and then explode if it was spilled.

Permalink to Comment

63. joeylawn on April 5, 2013 2:20 PM writes...

LOVED the comment on #3:

"Might have been there since benzene was linear."

LOLOL

Permalink to Comment

64. Oldnuke on April 7, 2013 2:35 PM writes...

Burning chicken? Now I know what to use if the chicken population in Southern Delaware gets out of control!

Brings a new meaning to the word "Roasters"...

Permalink to Comment

65. Quuxum on May 2, 2013 3:31 PM writes...

Yes! My library (UPitt) has a copy of "Ignition!" *requests*

Permalink to Comment

66. RoCkEt on May 2, 2013 5:05 PM writes...

Product Details
Ignition! An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants by John D. Clark (1972)

£1,222.20 used (1 offer)


Sounds like a book you should
'forget to take back.....'

Permalink to Comment

67. Rosaline Geldrich on June 21, 2013 1:22 AM writes...

Would anyone who has been a aspect of your program from the beginning mind sending me copies on the prior letters? I am signed up now but unfortunately did not hear of the until now. Many, many thanks in advance.

Permalink to Comment

68. Chris Jenkins on July 8, 2013 11:34 AM writes...

From the pubchem registry @ NIH:

"Incompatibilities: acids; ammonium fluoride; carbon tetrachloride; fluorinated polymers; fuels, hydrogen-containing materials; iodine; metals, or metal oxides, or metal salts or non-metals, or non-metal oxides; nitrocompounds; organic material; polychlorotrifluoroethylene; refractory material; water."


Can anyone think of a substance NOT covered by this list that is even *remotely* common?

Permalink to Comment

69. Kelly St. Clair on July 24, 2013 7:35 PM writes...

#68: They should just cross all of that out and replace it with "baryonic matter."

Permalink to Comment

70. Ralph on July 25, 2013 3:20 AM writes...

#69: Just baryonic matter? I bet given a positronium sample, ClF3 would take a crack at stealing the electrons and leaving the positrons sobbing in the gutter with a black eye.

Permalink to Comment

71. Andrew on August 30, 2013 5:20 AM writes...

a friend of mine told me a story of an old industrial site (now long closed) that used this oh so pleasant chemical, the father of this friend was tasked with refilling the tank of this hellish chemical, when about halfway through he noticed the pressure gauge on the pressurised container still read 0, meaning it was broken, he went to his supervisor who told him to hell with it finish filling it, he said no and went to the next person up who also said hell no and they changed the gauge,

the tank was at 1.5X its normal 'full' pressure,

Permalink to Comment

72. Sailorleo on September 4, 2013 11:05 PM writes...

#68: My best guess at the most common materiel not on the list would be something on the order of... charmonium, maybe?

Permalink to Comment

73. Galane on November 8, 2013 6:51 AM writes...

If scrith (Larry Niven's "Ringworld" series) was real, this stuff might possibly not react with it.

Permalink to Comment

74. Kenny Strawn on December 28, 2013 1:41 PM writes...

I wonder if compounds like ClF4N3 and/or ClF3(N3)2 have ever been synthesized...

Permalink to Comment

75. Kenny on December 28, 2013 1:44 PM writes...

I wonder if compounds like ClF4N3 and/or ClF3(N3)2 have ever been synthesized...

Permalink to Comment

76. Archon1995 on January 4, 2014 12:53 AM writes...

Galane: If scrith can be punctured by suitably-large applications of kinetic energy, then it'd react. Though probably not as quickly as non-synthetic materials.

Permalink to Comment

77. John Cowan on January 15, 2014 1:07 PM writes...

Oh, it can be. An asteroid slammed into the Ringworld and punched a hole in the scrith, in the process raising an Olympus Mons-class mountain. Not surprisingly, the native name for the mountain translates as Fist-Of-God.

But when you're dealing with something whose interatomic bonding has to approximate the strong force just to keep the Ringworld from disintegrating (I mean, an object the size of the Earth's orbit that revolves once every 30 days?!), mere-shmere chemistry just won't have much effect.

Permalink to Comment

78. androidsgame.com on June 18, 2014 1:54 PM writes...

3 prep," hid as being a "critical ѕystem update," but Apple doesn't issue these kinds of updates, so users ijstalled it manually-a telltale sign of malware. It is a biit more lke a case of distinguishing between your mother and herr clone. For Windows, PPTP and L2TP can also be an option, most users wiull go with Open - VPN oor SSTP because of the better security features.

Permalink to Comment

79. John Savard on July 29, 2014 1:38 PM writes...

In trying to figure out how the atoms in ClF3 are bound together, it seems like it is simply a ClF molecule and an F2 molecule bound together as one, sharing their covalent bonds; not something with a really unstable bond like hydrogen peroxide or FOOF.

But that should mean that ClF3 isn't any worse than plain old fluorine gas (even slightly milder due to being 1/4 chlorine) - except, of course, that the higher molecular weight means it's a liquid, and hence much denser and much more concentrated. Of course, maybe that's "bad enough", accounting for all the dangerous properties noted here, since fluorine is pretty nasty stuff itself.

But then, I'm not a chemist, and I may have missed some important facts.

Permalink to Comment

POST A COMMENT




Remember Me?



EMAIL THIS ENTRY TO A FRIEND

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):




RELATED ENTRIES
Why Not Bromine?
Fragonomics, Eh?
Amicus Fights Its Way Through in Fabry's
Did Pfizer Cut Back Some of Its Best Compounds?
Don't Optimize Your Plasma Protein Binding
Fluorinated Fingerprinting
One of Those Days
ChemDraw Days