Talk:Bunsen burner

message: If Bunsen wasn't the inventor (as correctly stated athk the start of the page) then why is he credited as "inventor" in the info box on the right?
I will change if no one has any objections?
Spuddddddd 30Feb08  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.90.97 (talk) 13:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inventor 

message: I notice from your article that the "Safety Flame" - so called because it is yellow - is anything but!  Apparently it emits CO (Carbon Monoxide) (which is poisonous) and particulates!
At school, there would be a class of thirty with maybe 15 Bunsen burners all on "standby" (i.e. with yellow flames) in a lab.  What were they doing to us?  And what about the poor science teachers and lab assistants?  Especially as in some schools they left the Bunsens on yellow all day between lessons!
No wonder science was one of the more tiring lessons, we were all falling asleep under the influence of CO!
:I personally wouldn't worry about the CO.  The AC probably took care of it.  What worries me is that there would be 15 unattended open flames both wasting fuel and creating a fire hazard in a classroom.  That's just ign'ant. GuildNavigator84 07:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Poisoning generations of kids!

message: what is the bunsen burner, its parts, and function?
can it be better improved?
can it be run by liquid fuel like petrol or kerosine?
how to use bunsen burner? er?
At what temperature range can a Bunsen burner effectively be used for? 
:No, bunsen burners can only run on a gas, and there is no need for it to be improved as it does its job perfectly. Bunsen burners are plugged into a gas tap which feeds the burner with natural gas, and the openings at the bottom allow it to suck in oxygen, increasing the temperature of the flame. What i would like to see is a better history of the device. What did Faraday's prototype look like? That is what i came here looking for. mastodon 22:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: functionality

message: Should bunsen burner be capitalised as in 'Bunsen burner' always?
IMHO yes. Dictionaries differ about this. The rot began with people referring familiarly to 'a bunsen' without a capital, which is obviously not the same as 'a Bunsen' (meaning a member of the Bunsen family). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: spelling

message: The text says:
:The device safely burns a continuous stream of gas without the risk that the flame will travel back down the tube to the gas supply.
Is there a source for this statement?  The statement does not correspond with my experience.  I have had the flame trave back down the tube to the gas supply many times.  Perhaps my school had defective Bunsen burners? --BostonMA 01:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It sometimes happens when the gas supply is not sufficient.  Then you may see a little blue flame at the bottom of the burner.  It's best to extinguish the flame at that point and sort out your gas problem. --196.25.3.250 05:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I am not the only one who has seen this.  You are correct 196.25.3.250, that the problem occurs when the gas flow is too low, and that you need to extinguish the flame and relight.  So, I think the phrase "without risk that the flame will travel back down the tube" should probably be removed, unless a source is provided.  I will remove it, but if anyone finds a source, they are welcome to restore.  --BostonMA 19:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think you're right.  As I understand most LP systems, the modification preventing a backed up flame from detonating the gas supply (like in a gas grill) is attached directly to the gas source itself.  There is no back-up prevention on the bunsen burner itself.  I'm also going to add a section on how the Bunsen burner is not an ideal laboratory heating instrument.  I've done a lot of chem lab work at the college level, and I've never once even *seen* a bunsen burner used.  Hot plates are a lot safer and a lot more controlled.GuildNavigator84 07:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You obviously work in a much more advanced lab than the ones where I was taught chemistry.  Bunsen burners were not much used for heating reactions in the Organic chem. courses after undergrad, and I did a lot of work on electrically heated oil baths with thermostats, but the inorganic folk and life scientists still use them a lot.  It's inconvenient to work in a lab without a Bunsen.  How else would you draw out a capillary glass tube to spot a TLC plate, sterilize a loop or round off the ends of a glass tube that you've just cut for some new experiment?  Here at the company where I work these days, there are no bunsens on the open benches in the QC labs, and almost all heating is done in water baths or on hot plates, but they have bunsens in the fume cupboards, and they are used reguarly. --Slashme 13:27, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aah, I see.  My work is mostly in O chem, so perhaps the modifications I've made to the article don't take into account the uses by inorganic chemists.  I'd say organic chemists are mostly interested in heating things, so the article is a bit skewed towards that perspective.  While I've never had to make my own glassware (and my capillary tubes come prepackaged), that's most definitely a good and valid use of a BB.  I mentioned sterilizing loops at the end of the article, but if you'd like to mention cap. tubes, pulling pipettes, and other glassware modifications, I'm sure it would be very welcome :-).  Also, is fume cupboard British English?  I've always called them fume hoods.  Cupboard is mentioned in the fume hood article, but no source is given.  Maybe someone should edit that as well, if it isn't just an alternate word. GuildNavigator84 20:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: So basically you're saying "British English" isn't British English! ;-)  lolerskates. I dunno.  Lorry, truck, colour, color, cupboard, hood.  Same difference.  I think the dialects agree on all the important things.  You'll have to excuse my phraseology; American dictionaries refer to usages predominantly heard in the United Kingdom and environs as "British English".  Justifiably so, in my opinion, because as far as a dictionary is concerned, the differences are few and can be easily grouped into "British" and "American".  Though don't get me wrong; I'm not an American linguistic chauvanist at all.  The Queen's English sounds a lot better than the President's. GuildNavigator84 07:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Slashme you anticipate too much and fulfil your own prophecy. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  without the risk that the flame will travel back down the tube to the gas supply? 

message: The Meeker burner doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere in Wikipedia yet.  This should be fixed, but preferably by someone who who knows about them than I do.... 71.82.169.63 05:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meeker burner 

message: This is not Cockney rhyming slang.  See the etymology from the OED entry for "bunce":
:Of unknown origin: it has been plausibly conjectured to be a corruption of bonus.
and the first usage is in 1719. --Slashme 15:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  bunce 

message: This comment was left within the article on 07:15, 28 February 2007 by Funkyliv
Bob f it 12:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment left within article 

message: Who uses a Bunsen Burner?
Chemistry students? 71.187.154.146 20:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Under References, The Origin of the Bunsen Burner (pdf) pops a login, then "Sorry. You must authenicate yourself as a JCE subscriber. "
This is my FIRST contribution, so rather than mess something up, I'm pointing it out in hope that someone who knows what they're doing might fix it.
Willbravo 19:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linked document requires subscription 

message: And correct the article but it has signs that someone who know what they were doing was at least involved. So I'll start here. The interesting features of the burner not discussed are (1) the double lip which is needed to get a circulating eddy and prevent the flame blowing itself out (you can get a stable flame without this but only at high turbulence, try lighting a gas tube) (2) the double structure of the flame at most settings with the inner flame premixed rich and the outer diffusion flame of partial burn gases (3) the fact that the blue colour comes from the combustion of CO which is the only reaction emitting in this part of the spectrum. Any comments before I rewrite a bit? --BozMo talk 21:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Am tempted to have a go 

message: what are the minimum and maximum tempratures that can be given off by a bunsen burner? 21:50 23 january 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.12.18.82 (talk) 21:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Im wondering 

message: Check this diff.  It looks as if a lot of contradictory material has been dumped into the article, and some removed.  I don't have the time or historical knowledge to sort it out, but one thing I noticed is that Michael Faraday is now listed as one of Bunsen's lab assistants. --Slashme (talk) 05:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for noting this.  It's not only dodgy history, it's completely invented.  And the other material in three new paragraphs (which I just removed) is repeated in the article already.Ajrocke (talk) 18:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dodgy edits 

message: In general, the scientist should make sure that hair and clothing are secure.
So everyone else is flameproof? Should probably be changed.06:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  And nonscientists? 

message: I think a nice addition to this article would be an image of the emission spectrum of a typical Bunsen burner.
Perhaps both kinds -- the pretty colored visible-light spectrum, as well as a "intensity vs. wavelength" graph.
--68.0.124.33 (talk) 17:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  image requested 

message: Did Bunsen patent his design?  (It seems not, but I think it should be asked.) The Jade Knight (talk) 05:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent? 

message: Just ran across a box full of Bunsen burners for "Artificial Gas." Didn't know such a thing existed, but they are still being sold. Should this article mention that there are Bunsen burners for both natural and artificial gas(es)? Anyway, someone had labelled these as defective, but I assume that artificial gas Bunsen workers don't work on natural gas, and perhaps vice versa. The mechanics of the burner don't seem different. Does anyone know how the two differ and/or why artificial burners don't work with natural gas? The only hypothesis I can come up with is that it has something to do with the gas pressure, but that's just a guess.
Also what the heck would be an "artificial gas" that would be hooked up to a Bunsen burner? Liquid propane and Alcohol use other different burners, so that rules them out, even if you consider them to be "artificial." Ileanadu (talk) 17:10, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just read the wikipedia article History of manufactured gas--J intela (talk) 09:04, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand it depending on the type of gas in use different gas jets are needed to get the right flow rate/mixing (this applied to pretty much any gas burner, not just bunsens). On modern equipment these are generally a component that can be swapped out but on older equipment it may not be possible to swap out the jet either because it's not a separately replaceable component or because suitable parts are no longer available. 188.222.186.27 (talk) 19:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artificial Gas Bunsen Burner 

message: Should we not add a section about the use of a bunsen burner in microbiology?
It is commonly used to work sterile on the bench.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garnhami (talk • contribs) 19:29, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microbiology 

message: The article is about a heat source but nowhere does it mention how hot it can get??? 108.200.234.93 (talk) 22:38, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temperature 

message: Article reads:
:existing laboratory burner lamps left much to be desired not just in terms of the heat of the flame, but also regarding economy and simplicity.
It would be useful to know a bit more about the previously existing burners and how exactly Bunsen improved on them. --Macrakis (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Predecessors