Difference between revisions of "Thin Layer Chromatography"
m (→Results) |
|||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
Please note the following quality issues: | Please note the following quality issues: | ||
− | * The plates were not pre-washed and show considerable material on the solvent front. This was also present with a plate with no sample. | + | * The plates were not pre-washed in the solvent comparison and show considerable material on the solvent front. This was also present with a plate with no sample. |
* Because the spot was small, uv lighting safe but unsophisticated, and a phone was used for photography, the images have been highly processed to accentuate the spot | * Because the spot was small, uv lighting safe but unsophisticated, and a phone was used for photography, the images have been highly processed to accentuate the spot | ||
Revision as of 11:30, 17 May 2020
Contents
TLC Intro
Here you will find some experiments in thin layer chromatography of mehdma samples. The information should be relevant to magic samples as well, and also to other forms of chromatography.
Please note that the content here, at the time of writing, is by a beginner in TLC so do not expect it to be definitive.
Preparation
Two preparations have been tested:
- Salt version: salt dissolved in isopropanol 10mg per ml, plus a small amount of ammonia (possibly not necessary). Takes a long time to dissolve
- Freebased mehdma, dissolved in DCM, 10mg per ml (minus losses in freebasing procedure)
TLC systems
- System 1: ethyl acetate : Methanol : Water : Ammonia as 95 : 3.5 : 1.5 : 0.75
- System 2: DCM : Methanol : Ammonia as 90 : 9 : 1
Plates
Silica 254 UV Loaded with pulled capillary for a small spot
Visualisation
254nm UV
Results
Please note the following quality issues:
- The plates were not pre-washed in the solvent comparison and show considerable material on the solvent front. This was also present with a plate with no sample.
- Because the spot was small, uv lighting safe but unsophisticated, and a phone was used for photography, the images have been highly processed to accentuate the spot
Solvent system comparison
- The ethyl acetate system failed to move the spot at all for the salt preparation, and only slightly for the freebase version (possibly due to the DCM in the sample prep?). Only the failed freebase version is shown.
- Both the salt and freebase moved well with the DCM based system
- Only one spot was observed
Reagent tests
Here are the results of marquis, froedhe and ehrlich reagents applied for visualisation. The photos have been processed so that the spot appeared as observed. Due to the camera used, and the automatic processing, this means the following images are inconsistent but the spots are reasonably close to the colours observered.
- Freebase sample was used
- Plates were pre-washed with methanol, which reduced the presence of material on the solvent front
- No additional spots were found
- Ehrlich never revealed a spot
- Reference marquis and froedhe spots (on the plate but not put through TLC) were observed to be black
- After TLC, the marquis and froedhe spots were more vivid than applying the reagents to the raw sample, or to the plated reference
- Marquis had a vibrant blue to light blue fringe
- Froedhe had a vibrant purple fringe, later becoming slightly redder
To do
- Other reagent and other visualisation methods applied to plates.
- Different systems