File talk:Simple distillation appratus.jpg

1. Does anyone know why there is a light gray area below the condenser and at the bottom of this pic? It is not apparent when a reduced size version of this pic is shown.

The gray area is meant to be a cooling bath, maybe it is not clear in gray (I was trying to keep it simple), when I get a chance I change it to blue.Quantockgoblin 19:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we are talking about the same gray area. Also this pic title has the spelling "appratus" in it. Correct spelling is "apparatus". Once a pic is uploaded with a certain title, I believe only an admin can fix it. I will have more comments a little later.
H Padleckas 21:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I mentioned the light gray area, I'm not talking about the darker gray in the receiving flask cooling bath. I'm talking about a very light gray area below the condenser and to the left of the receiving flask and a band of light gray across the bottom of the pic, looking perhaps like shadowing of some sort.

Another thing, vacuum adapters for distillations have a concentric internal tube in the downstream half of the vacuum adapter. This internal tube is fused to the outer tube at about the middle of the vacuum adapter. The vacuum hose connector goes to the annulus between the inner and outer tubes. See my pic. Your (User:Quantockgoblin) pic doesn't show this internal tube. When you modify your pic next, can you put it in there?

My pic shows several uneven looking particles at the bottom of the distilling flask which are boiling chips, where were mentioned in the Round-bottom flask article. Your pic shows a stirring bar instead. Maybe I'll ask around which way it's more commonly done.

My pic is intended to be basically a cross-sectional diagram. If you look carefully (the liquids and vapors are very light blue in mine), my distilling flask shows small bubbles for boiling but no boiling in the receiving flask. There are also vapors above the boiling liquid, going through the distillation head and into the condenser, where it shows droplets being formed, then dripping down through the vacuum adapter into the receiving flask. I put these features in to show the common person how distillation works. Maybe I should have used a darker blue. Your pic doesn't show these features. Is it worth putting them in? H Padleckas 02:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H Padleckas Yes you are quite correct about the inner tube on the distillation side - although to be fair it is not absolutely necessary - but I will change it (I nearly did last night). Stirrer bars are nearly exclusively used in research, however, at school I suspect anti-bumping granules/boiling chips are still used. I omitted the vapour and condensate as I though it might make the image too cluttered, but I think may be it is worth adding. Yes - I spotted the typo in apparatus too, when I updated the image to a PNG format!! With respect to your images, yes I think a darker blue would work better, and I think the bunsen and tripod need to be in cross section too.(please also see my comments in the lower section).Quantockgoblin 10:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2. A question to User:Quantockgoblin: On this and other diagrams you uploaded into Wikipedia, you used the JPG file format which often makes diagrams fuzzy. Is there a reason why you didn't use PNG or GIF format (or SVG if you have the software to make it)? GIF format only uses a limited number of colors, but PNG format is lossless (doesn't make unscaled diagrams fuzzy), can provide practically any shade of color, usually uses far less memory than BMP format (which is not allowed anyway) for diagrams, and can be used by anyone who has Windows XP (by using Paint). Windows XP Paint can convert BMP files to PNG files, but once a pic file has been converted to JPG format, that JPG file has incurred irreversible losses which often makes it fuzzy.

I use .jpg because they are smaller than .bmp. I'd did realise that PNG files didn't make the images fuzzy. I'll see about converting the images I created into PNG.Quantockgoblin 19:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I would like to move the simple distillation picture comparison discussion from Talk:Distillation to here because that page has become too long (about 40+ kB) and this page has lots of room. H Padleckas 13:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

part of talk from Talk:Distillation#new pic(s) ? moved here

.......
.......

While we are on the subject of making images understood by your "laymen", the very first image in this article needs to label the round bottom boiling flask, the electrical heater, the round bottom distillate receiver, the thermometer, the condenser, the cooling water inlet and outlet, and the gas outlet just above the distillate receiver. Although you and I may readily recognize those items, the average non-chemist laymen wouldn't have a clue as to what he was looking at without those labels. - mbeychok 02:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a point there. Though many high-school students at least have seen a round bottom flask and a condenser (and I am sure people know what a thermometer is). But indeed, we might have to take it even one or two steps further than that. But I see we are making progress, cheers! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my picture in WikiCommons which was recently replaced in this article by a picture by User:Quantockgoblin, most likely because he(she) thought burner heating was outdated:

I intentionally labeled the parts with numbers instead of English terms so that this same picture could be used in many languages. At my last count, 12 different language Wikipedias were using my picture. The numbered terms can be included in the pic caption, which could be more easily changed in every language Wikimedia. The page for this pic in WikiCommons shows the terms for the parts 1-10 in English. I am considering modifying this pic to replace the burner with the hot plate in the newer pic and re-inserting it into this article - when I get around to it - LOL. H Padleckas 16:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Padleckas, why not revise your picture to replace the Bunsen burner with an electrical heater, upload it into Wikipedia, and then use it to replace the one by User:Quantockgoblin? Then provide the English names for the numbered items in the picture's caption. As you said, other language users then need only to change the caption to their language. - mbeychok 18:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H Padleckas, the drawing I upload could also be numbered, and has the benefit that it already has a hot plate and stirrer bar. Thinking about it, maybe a red arrow to denote heat might be a better idea. I also didn't really like the joints in your picture, as they look like they would leak - I used ground glass joints which are better. And yes I thought the use of a burner is fairly dated and arguably dangerous. And, I guess push-come-to-shove I think mine drawing looks nicer! I'll go with whatever other editors think is best. I didn't over write your images as I wanted to get other editors views. I think if I saved over your image, your diagram would be replace on all other wiki pages that use it. This would mean that I'd have to use your numbering. Quantockgoblin 20:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H Padleckas - I've taken your lessons on board. I've updated my image as a PNG formatted images (yes it is sharper - thanks). I've also added lables using the same numbering system as you used. I will try and update the rest of the images I created likewise Quantockgoblin 08:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quantockgoblin,looks pretty good. No urgency but next time you revise this pic, I would suggest changing the numerals "11" and "12" from black to white for better visibility against the dark gray background. H Padleckas 16:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H Padleckas, Quick question - I've uploaded a new version of my distillation piture to wiki commons but it doesn't seem to update the picture on wikipedia site? How do I redirect the source of the picture to the commons one, which I will now keep up-to-date? Thanks

I am able to see the new version of your picture, which means it uploaded correctly. Thanks for making the improvement. I have noticed many times before that when uploading revised versions of pics, it may take up to several days (or sometimes even longer) for the revised pic to become visible. Other people using the internet can often see it faster, like I can right now. I'm not sure why this happens, but I learned to just wait. No urgency, but there is still no internal tube in the vacuum adapter. Also, no put-down intended for Theresa Knott who's done a lot for Wikimedia, but the top pic in Fractional distillation could use more modernizing than my pic did. Care to insert a fractionating column into your pic as a replacement? H Padleckas 16:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:Simple distillation appratus.jpg

part of talk from Talk:Distillation#new pic(s) ? moved here

Navigation menu

Search