September 29, 2024, 03:28:30 AM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting


Topic: Basic Nomenclature  (Read 5742 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline coolguy99

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
  • Mole Snacks: +0/-1
Basic Nomenclature
« on: September 10, 2009, 11:48:06 PM »


this is how I worked it out:



4-tert-butyl 1,2-dimethyl hexanol

Is that right? :(

Offline Schrödinger

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1162
  • Mole Snacks: +138/-98
  • Gender: Male
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #1 on: September 11, 2009, 04:50:08 AM »
-OH IS the principal functional group - you were right about that of course.

But if you are looking for the IUPAC name, find the longest chain (if two chains are equal in length, consider the one containing the most number of substituents and functional group).

 Moreover, i don't think we use names like tert-butyl, i-propyl etc. although they are accepted names. You are supposed to use numbers for substituents in the IUPAC nomenclature. I mean like, that gives a nice and good picture of a molecule.
"Destiny is not a matter of chance; but a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for; it is a thing to be achieved."
- William Jennings Bryan

Offline Dan

  • Retired Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4716
  • Mole Snacks: +469/-72
  • Gender: Male
  • Organic Chemist
    • My research
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2009, 04:58:53 AM »
You haven't quite found the longest chain, almost though...
My research: Google Scholar and Researchgate

Offline Fridushka

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
  • Mole Snacks: +17/-9
  • Gender: Female
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2009, 05:28:07 AM »
Yeah you haven't found your longest chain, refer to the name you have named it can also help you ;)..

Good Luck :)

Offline coolguy99

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
  • Mole Snacks: +0/-1
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2009, 09:52:57 AM »
alright, I see what I did wrong with the chain, I think..



so...

5-ethyl-3-methyl-6-dimethyl heptanol?


Offline sjb

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3653
  • Mole Snacks: +222/-42
  • Gender: Male
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2009, 11:56:12 AM »
alright, I see what I did wrong with the chain, I think..
...
5-ethyl-3-methyl-6-dimethyl heptanol?

Almost there - you don't say where the alcohol is, and you can condense some of your substituents into fewer prefixes....

Offline coolguy99

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
  • Mole Snacks: +0/-1
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2009, 12:00:24 PM »
yeah after I posted I realized I could combine dimethyl and methyl..

so..

5-ethyl-3,6-trimethyl heptanol

how do you specify where the alcohol is, though? I don't think we learned that (yet?) :(

Offline Dan

  • Retired Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4716
  • Mole Snacks: +469/-72
  • Gender: Male
  • Organic Chemist
    • My research
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2009, 01:02:43 PM »
5-ethyl-3,6-trimethyl heptanol

If it's trimethyl you need three numbers - ie. 3,6,6-trimethyl (to distinguish it from 3,3,6-trimethyl)

For the alcohol part, here's an example - isopropanol (CH3CHOHCH3) is systematically named propan-2-ol.
My research: Google Scholar and Researchgate

Offline coolguy99

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
  • Mole Snacks: +0/-1
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2009, 01:13:06 PM »
Alright, that's making some sense, so..


5-ethyl-3,6,6-trimethyl-heptan-2-ol

?

Offline Schrödinger

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1162
  • Mole Snacks: +138/-98
  • Gender: Male
Re: Basic Nomenclature
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2009, 01:47:32 PM »
correct
"Destiny is not a matter of chance; but a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for; it is a thing to be achieved."
- William Jennings Bryan

Sponsored Links