Physicochemical Properties of LiFSI Solutions II: LiFSI with Water

Article Cite This: J. Chem. Eng. Data XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

pubs.acs.org/jced

Physicochemical Properties of LiFSI Solutions II: LiFSI with Water, MTBE, and Anisole Johannes Neuhaus, Erik von Harbou,* and Hans Hasse Laboratory of Engineering Thermodynamics (LTD), University of Kaiserslautern, Erwin-Schrödinger Str. 44, D-67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany

J. Chem. Eng. Data Downloaded from pubs.acs.org by WEBSTER UNIV on 02/21/19. For personal use only.

S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: This article is the second in a series in which the thermodynamic properties of solutions of lithium bis(fluorosulfonylimide (LiFSI) are investigated. The solvents that are considered here are methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) and water (H2O), which are good solvents for LiFSI, and anisole, which is an antisolvent for LiFSI. The solubility of LiFSI in MTBE, as well as in the binary solvent mixture MTBE-anisole, was measured at temperatures of between 283 and 303 K and concentrations of LiFSI of up to 0.47 mol mol−1. Furthermore, the liquid−liquid equilibrium of the system LiFSI-MTBE-H2O was studied at 293 K and ambient pressure. Moreover, the density and shear viscosity of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE were studied at temperatures between 273 and 308 K and concentrations of LiFSI up to 0.4 mol mol−1.

1. INTRODUCTION

such a way that the simplest relations were obtained. This approach leads to further differences between parts I and II.

This is the second paper in a series of two papers that reports on thermodynamic properties of solutions of lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI) in different organic solvents and water. In Part I of the series,1 we have presented results for LiFSI in the solvents valeronitrile, dichloromethane, 1,2-dichloroethane, and 1,2-dichlorobenzene. In the present paper, this work is extended to the solvents methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), anisole, and water. All of these solvents are interesting for the production of LiFSI,2−4 and the thermodynamic properties that were measured are interesting for process design. Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) is a good solvent for LiFSI that is only weakly soluble in water and is therefore interesting for the extraction and crystallization of LiFSI. Moreover, anisole is a potential antisolvent of LiFSI.3,4 The solubility of LiFSI in MTBE as well as in the binary solvent mixture MTBE-anisole was studied in this work. Furthermore, data on the liquid−liquid equilibrium of the system LiFSI-MTBE-H2O and data on the density and shear viscosity of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE are supplied. Such data have been unavailable in the literature so far. For additional general information, the reader is referred to the introduction in part I.1 Parts I and II in this series differ not only in the solvents that were studied but also in the properties that were investigated. For example, in the present work liquid−liquid equilibria are studied because they play a role in systems in which water and MTBE are present. The methods that were used for measuring density and viscosity differ because new equipment was available for the studies in part II. Besides the experimental data, correlations are also presented. In all cases, they were chosen in © XXXX American Chemical Society

2. EXPERIMENTAL SECTION 2.1. Chemicals and Sample Preparation. Lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI, ≥0.999 g g−1) was supplied by Budan Process UG. Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE, anhydrous, ≥0.998 g g−1) and anisole (AN, anhydrous, ≥0.997 g g−1) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. All chemicals were used as received. The water content of the pure components was determined by coulometric Karl Fischer titration (Metrohm 831 KF coulometer) and was found to be below 80 × 10−6 g g−1 for all solvents and below 30 × 10−6 g g−1 for LiFSI. All chemicals were handled in an inert gas glovebox (GS Glovebox Technik) that maintained a nitrogen atmosphere with a water content of less than 2 × 10−6 g g−1, and the samples were prepared as described in part I.1 Table 1 contains the sample description with information on the CAS number, source, purification method, and purities for all substances used in the present work. 2.2. Measurements. 2.2.1. Density and Shear Viscosity. For the measurements of the density and the shear viscosity, a combined instrument from Anton Paar (SVM 3000) was used. With this instrument, the density is measured with the vibrating tube technique and the shear viscosity is measured with a Stabinger viscosimeter. This instrument has the advantage to require only small amounts of solutions as compared to the Received: July 10, 2018 Accepted: January 18, 2019

A

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jced.8b00595 J. Chem. Eng. Data XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data

Article

Table 1. Sample Description Table chemical name

CAS number

source

purification method

purity

lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide methyl tert-butyl ether anisole water

171611-11-3 1634-04-4 100-66-3 7732-18-5

Budan Process UG Sigma-Aldrich Sigma-Aldrich

none none none reverse osmosis

≥0.9999 g g−1 ≥0.998 g g−1 ≥0.9997 g g−1 ≥0.9999 g g−1

instruments that were used in part I.1 The measurements of the density were conducted according to ASTM method D4052, and the measurements of the dynamic viscosity, according to ASTM method D7042. Before and after each set of measurements, the apparatus was cleaned with toluene, water, and ethanol and flushed with dry nitrogen. The measurements were carried out at ambient pressure. The apparatus was calibrated with a calibration standard provided by the manufacturer. Three other standards purchased from Paragon Scientific Ltd. (D5, N14, and N100) were used for testing. Relative deviations between the reported value and our own measurements were found to be below ±0.05% for the density and below ±0.7% for the viscosity in the temperature range between 273 and 333 K. All measurements in the present work were repeated three times for a given temperature and sample composition. The results that are reported here are the arithmetic mean of these three measurements. The relative standard deviation of the three measurements was ≤0.15% for both the density and the viscosity. We conclude that the relative standard uncertainty of the density data reported here is about ±0.15%. Furthermore, the relative standard uncertainty in the measurement of the shear viscosity higher than 1.5 mPa s is ±0.7%. For lower viscosities, we estimate the relative standard uncertainty to be ±10%. The temperature was measured with a built-in thermometer for which the manufacturer reports a standard uncertainty of ±0.05 K. This may be too optimistic. Our estimate for the standard uncertainty in the temperature is ±0.1 K. 2.2.2. Solid−Liquid Equilibrium. The solid−liquid equilibrium was determined by isothermal titration. The experimental setup and procedure are reported part I.1 The standard uncertainty in the temperature measurement is estimated to be ±0.2 K. The standard uncertainty in the data for the mole fraction of LiFSI at the solubility limit is estimated to be ±0.004 mol mol−1. 2.2.3. Liquid−Liquid Equilibrium. The liquid−liquid equilibrium data in the present work were determined by a standard method using three thermostated double-jacketed glass vessels. The vessels were filled with known amounts of substances, which were determined gravimetrically, so that a liquid twophase system was obtained. The total mass of each mixture was approximately 25 g. The heterogeneous mixtures were stirred vigorously for 3 h with a magnetic stirrer. The stirrer was turned off, and the phases were settled overnight. It was checked in preliminary experiments that equilibrium was established. The temperature of the mixture was measured with a Pt100 resistance thermometer (accuracy ±0.1 K). A sample from the top phase was drawn with a syringe through a septum at the top of the vessels. A sample from the bottom phase was drawn with a syringe through a septum at the bottom of the vessels. The liquid−liquid phase interface was never penetrated during the sampling. The experiments were carried out at atmospheric pressure. The reproducibility of the results was checked by a triple measurement of one tie line. The relative deviation of the repeated measurements did not exceed the analysis error.

The composition of the samples was determined as follows: The concentration of water was determined by Karl Fischer titration (Metrohm 870 KF Titrino Plus). In a preliminary test, the standard uncertainty of the measurements was found to be below ±0.0006 g g−1. The concentration of LiFSI was determined by 19F NMR in a NMR spectrometer with a 9.4 T vertical superconducting magnet corresponding to a proton Larmor frequency of 400.25 MHz. The NMR spectrometer was equipped with a probe with cryogenically cooled electronics (magnet Ascend 400, console Avance 3 HD 400, probe CyroProbe Prodigy, Bruker Biospin). The integrated temperature sensor was calibrated according to the procedure given by Ammann et al.5 The measurements were conducted at 298.15 K and ambient pressure (accuracy ±0.1 K). NMR glass tubes with a outer diameter of 5 mm, which were sealed with silicon caps, were used. The glass tubes were cleaned with water, ethanol, and acetone and dried in an oven at 80 °C. The homogeneous liquid samples were diluted with a stock solution of known composition to prevent liquid two-phase separation due to the addition of an internal standard. Benzenesulfonyl fluoride (C6H5SO2F, Sigma-Aldrich) was used as an internal standard. A volume of 0.8 mL of the premixed homogeneous samples was used to fill the NMR glass tubes. The 19F NMR spectra were acquired with the following parameters: acquisition time = 4.8 s with 32K data points, relaxation delay = 30 s, pulse width = 90°, and number of scans = 32. For all NMR spectra, an automatic phase correction and third-order polynomial baseline correction were performed. The relative standard uncertainty of this method was checked by the measurement of samples with known composition and is estimated to be less than 2.5%. The concentration of MTBE was calculated from the summation equation.

3. CORRELATIONS The empirical correlations that are used here are similar to those in part I, albeit in most cases they are not identical. Therefore, they are fully documented here. 3.1. Density. The dependence of the specific density ρ of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE on the mole fraction of LiFSI, xLiFSI, and temperature is described by eq 1 ij ρ yz jj zz = a + a jij x LiFSI zyz jj 0 1j −3 z −1 z z k mol mol { k g cm {

(1)

where a0 is the density of pure solvent MTBE and the temperature dependence is described by iT y a0 = a01 + a02jjj zzz kK {

(2)

a01, a02, and a1 are adjustable parameters. 3.2. Shear Viscosity. The dependence of the shear viscosity η of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE on the composition and the temperature is described by eq 3 B



Article

2 i c y i c y i η yz zz = A 0 + A1jjj LiFSI−1 zzz + A 2 jjj LiFSI−1 zzz lnjjj (3) k mPa s { k mol L { k mol L { where cLiFSI is the molarity of LiFSI and Ai represents empirical temperature-dependent functions

i b y i c y Ai = ai + jjjj i zzzz + jjjj i zzzz (4) k T /K { k T /K { with i = (0, 1, 2). ai, bi, and ci are adjustable parameters. 3.3. Solid−Liquid Equilibrium. MTBE is a good solvent for LiFSI, wheras the solubility of LiFSI in anisole is negligible. The temperature dependence of the solubility of LiFSI in MTBE is correlated using 2

ij x LiFSI yz iT y jj z = A 0 + A1jjj zzz −1 z (5) kK { k mol mol { where xLiFSI is the apparent mole fraction of LiFSI and A0 and A1 are adjustable parameters. The solubility of LiFSI in binary solvent mixture MTBEanisole is described by a mixing rule.

Figure 1. Specific density of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE as a function of the mole fraction of LiFSI and the temperature. Symbols: experimental data. Surface: correlation (eq 1 with parameters from Table 3).

Table 2. Experimental Data of the Density and Shear Viscosity of Solutions of LiFSI in MTBE at 101.3 kPaa

MTBE anisole x LiFSI = xMTBE x LiFSI + xanisole x LiFSI + xMTBE xanisole B0 ̃ ̃ ̃ ̃

(6)

T/K

xLiFSI/mol mol−1

ρ/g cm−3

η/mPa s

273.15

0.0000 0.1001 0.2000 0.2497 0.3002 0.3498 0.3995 0.0000 0.0999 0.2000 0.2498 0.3001 0.3498 0.3995 0.0000 0.1000 0.1996 0.2494 0.3000 0.3490 0.3994 0.0000 0.1001 0.2000 0.2498 0.3001 0.3498 0.3995

0.7613 0.8827 1.0111 1.0759 1.1440 1.2150 1.2711 0.7459 0.8672 0.9951 1.0616 1.1283 1.1989 1.2558 0.7350 0.8568 0.9833 1.0511 1.1179 1.1828 1.2465 0.7246 0.8470 0.9801 1.0412 1.1085 1.1782 1.2354

0.495 1.178 5.933 19.889 109.668 775.583

anisole xMTBE LiFSI and xLiFSI are the apparent mole fractions of LIFSI in pure

solvents MTBE and anisole, respectively. x̃i is the mole fraction of solvent i in the LiFSI-free mixture of anisole in MTBE. B0 is an adjustable parameter. As the solubility of LiFSI in pure solvent anisole is negligible (Results and Discussion), eq 6 can be simplified to eq 7. MTBE x LiFSI = xMTBE x LiFSI + xMTBE (1 − xMTBE )B0 ̃ ̃ ̃

288.15

(7)

The development of a model of the Gibbs energy of the studied electrolyte solutions was not in the scope of the present work. 3.4. Parameter Estimation. All adjustable parameters were determined from fits to experimental data from the present work. As an objective function, the sum of the squared relative deviations between the experimental results and the correlation results of all data points was used. The optimization was carried out in Mathworks Matlab 2016b using the solver lsqnonlin.

298.15

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Density. Figure 1 shows the experimental data for the density of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE together with their correlation by eq 1. The numerical experimental data is presented in Table 2, and the parameters of the correlations, in Table 3. The correlation describes the experimental data within the experimental uncertainty. Figure 1 shows that the density depends linearly on the temperature and on the mole fraction of LiFSI. Thus, the chosen correlation (eq 1) can describe the experimental results well. 4.2. Shear Viscosity. Figure 2 shows the experimental data for the shear viscosity of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE together with their correlation by eq 3. The numerical experimental data is presented in Table 2, and the parameters of the correlations, in Table 4. The correlation (eq 3) describes the experimental results well. The coefficient of determination R2 is 0.9996. The maximal absolute deviation of the experimental data and the correlation is 2 mPa s, which is slightly higher than the experimental uncertainty. Both the temperature and the molarity of LiFSI have a strong influence on the viscosity, as expected. For low temperature and

308.15

0.421 0.900 3.739 11.365 43.722 227.539 0.381 0.769 2.932 7.928 26.899 104.899 0.328 0.684 2.662 6.002 18.168 67.266

Standard uncertainties u are u(xLiFSI) = 0.0001 mol mol−1, u(T) = 0.1 K, ur(ρ) = 0.0015, ur(η ≤ 1.5 mPa s) = 0.025, ur(η ≥ 1.5 mPa s) = 0.007, and u(p) = 3 kPa. a

Table 3. Parameters of the Correlation Function (Equation 1) for the Density of Solutions of LiFSI in MTBE a01

a02

a1

1.0485496

−0.0010512

1.27729

a high molarity of LiFSI, a very strong increase in the viscosity is observed. The dependence on temperature is more important in regions where the viscosity is high. The increase in viscosity with C



Article

Table 5. Experimental Data of the Solid−Liquid Equilibrium in Systems LiFSI-MTBE and LiFSI-Anisole at 101.3 kPaa LiFSI-MTBE T/K

xLiFSI/mol mol−1b

283.15 293.15 303.15

0.4330 0.4533 0.4705 LiFSI-anisole

T/K

xLiFSI/mol mol−1c

293.15

≤0.0007

a

Liquid-phase data. The solid phase is pure LiFSI. bStandard uncertainties u are u(xLiFSI) = 0.004 mol mol−1, u(T) = 0.2 K, and u(p) = 3 kPa. cStandard uncertainties u are u(xLiFSI) = 1 × 10−5 mol mol−1, u(T) = 0.2 K, and u(p) = 3 kPa. Figure 2. Shear viscosity of solutions of LIFSI in MTBE as a function of the molarity of LiFSI and the temperature. Symbols: experimental data. Surface: correlation (eq 3 with parameters from Table 4).

Table 6. Parameters of the Correlation Functions (Equations 5 and 7) for the Solid−Liquid Equilibrium of System LiFSIMTBE-Anisole

Table 4. Parameters of the Correlation Function (Equation 3) for the Shear Viscosity of Solutions of LiFSI in MTBE a0

b0

a1

b1

a2

b2

−4.1374

939.7241

1.8845

−406.8251

−1.2495

476.3782

A0

A1

B0

−0.09694

0.00188

0.32110

experiment in which the coexisting phases obtained from a supersaturated solution were separated and the crystalline solid phase was separated. Subsequently, the crystalline solid phase was washed with dichloromethane, vacuum dried, and dissolved in dry methanol. The obtained sample was analyzed in a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectrometer (Bruker Avance 3 HD 400 MHz NMR equipped with a cryogenic probe). The acquired 1H, 13C, and 19F NMR spectra confirmed that the crystalline solid phase was pure LiFSI (xMTBE < 1 × 10−5 mol mol−1, estimated from the limit of detection). 4.3.2. LiFSI-MTBE-Anisole. Figure 4 shows the experimental data for the solubility of LiFSI in binary solvent mixture MTBE-

increasing molarity of LiFSI can be explained by the strong ion− dipole coordination of Li+ and the oxygen of the ether group of the MTBE molecules. This coordination leads to large and poorly mobile complexes. Additionally, the large FSI − contributes to the increase in viscosity. 4.3. Solid−Liquid Equilibria. 4.3.1. LiFSI-MTBE. Figure 3 shows the experimental data of the solubility of LiFSI in MTBE

Figure 3. Solid−liquid equilibrium in the system LiFSI-MTBE. Symbols: experimental data. Line: correlation (eq 5 with parameters from Table 6). Figure 4. Solid−liquid equilibria in the system LiFSI-MTBE-anisole. Symbols: experimental data. Lines: correlation of experimental data (eq 7 with parameters from Table 6).

together with their correlation by eq 5. The numerical experimental data is presented in Table 5, and the parameters of the correlations, in Table 6. The correlation describes the experimental data for LiFSI in solutions of MTBE within the experimental uncertainty. The maximal deviation between experiment and correlation is 0.001 mol mol−1. The solubility of LiFSI increases with increasing temperature. Furthermore, the steady increase in the solubility indicates that no transition of the solid phase occurs in the investigated temperature range. This finding was verified in an additional

anisole together with the corresponding correlation using eq 7. The numerical experimental data are presented in Table 7, and the correlation parameters, in Table 6. The correlation describes the experimental data well. The absolute deviations are in the band of the experimental uncertainty. Figure 4 shows that the solubility of LiFSI is reduced upon addition of anisole to solutions of LiFSI in MTBE. The resulting D



Article

were investigated experimentally at 293 K. Empirical correlations are provided for the density, shear viscosity, and solid− liquid equilibria that are faithful representations of the experimental data. The present results show that LiFSI is highly soluble in MTBE and that it is almost insoluble in anisole, which is a good antisolvent. Pure LiFSI can be obtained from the studied solutions by crystallization. The liquid−liquid equilibrium of binary mixture MTBE-H2O indicates that LiFSI has a strong solubilizing effect on the miscibility gap between MTBE and H2O. The enrichment of LiFSI in the aqueous phase shows that MTBE is not well suited for the extractive separation of LiFSI from an aqueous phase.

Table 7. Experimental Data of the Solid−Liquid Equilibrium in the System LiFSI-MTBE-Anisole at 293.15 K and 101.3 kPaa,b xLiFSI/mol mol−1

xanisole/mol mol−1

0.2172 0.3067 0.3774

0.5219 0.3467 0.2075

a

Liquid-phase data. The solid phase is pure LiFSI. bStandard uncertainties u are u(xi) = 0.004 mol mol−1, u(T) = 0.2 K, and u(p) = 3 kPa.

■

curve is slightly bent, which was the reason for introducing the nonlinear term in eq 7. 4.4. Liquid−Liquid Equilibria. Figure 5 shows the experimental data of the liquid−liquid equilibrium of the system LiFSI-MTBE-H2O at 293 K and ambient pressure. The numerical experimental data are presented in Table 8.

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jced.8b00595.

■

Figure 5. Composition of the coexisting phases of the liquid−liquid equilibrium in the system LiFSI-MTBE-H2O at 293 K and ambient pressure. Lines and circles: experimental tie lines. Crosses: feed.

wH2O/g g−1

wLiFSI/g g−1

wH2O/g g−1

0.0000 0.0414 0.0717 0.0946 0.1646

0.0133 0.0335 0.0868 0.1411 0.2832

0.0000 0.0880 0.1119 0.1484 0.1901

0.9704 0.8829 0.8254 0.6803 0.3994

AUTHOR INFORMATION

*E-mail: [email protected]. Phone: +49-631/2054685. Fax: +49-631/205-3835. ORCID

Johannes Neuhaus: 0000-0003-1528-4811 Erik von Harbou: 0000-0001-9228-8942

bottom phase

wLiFSI/g g−1

Literature comparisons of the experimental density data of pure MTBE from this work to data from the literature and of the experimental shear viscosity data of pure MTBE from this work to data from the literature; 1H NMR spectra, 13C NMR spectra, and 19F NMR spectra of a solution of crystallized and redissolved LiFSI crystals in MTBE (PDF)

Corresponding Author

Table 8. Experimental Data of the Liquid−Liquid Equilibrium in Ternary System LiFSI-H2O-MTBE at 293 K and 101.3 kPaa top phase

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

REFERENCES

(1) Neuhaus, J.; von Harbou, E.; Hasse, H. Physico-chemical Properties of Binary and Ternary Mixtures of LiFSI with Valeronitrile, Dichloromethane, 1,2-Dichloroethane, and 1,2-Dichlorobenzene. J. Chem. Eng. Data, submitted for publication, 2018. (2) Singh, R. P.; Martin, J. L. Concentrated Electrolyte Solution. U.S. Patent 20160149262A1, 2015. (3) Yamauchi, T.; Sato, Y.; Okajima, M.; Sato, S.; Okumura, Y. Method for Producing Alkali Metal Salt of Fluorosulfonyl Imide. Japanese patent 2014201453A, 2013. (4) Okumura, Y.; Sato, S.; Okajima, M.; Kobatake, T.; Katsuyama, H. Method for Manufacturing Electrolyte Solution Material. U.S. Patent 20170214092A1, 2017. (5) Claude Ammann, P. M.; Andre, M. A simple multinuclear NMR thermometer. J. Magn. Reson. (1969-1992) 1982, 46, 319−321. (6) Mohammad, S.; Held, C.; Altuntepe, E.; Köse, T.; Gerlach, T.; Smirnova, I.; Sadowski, G. Salt influence on MIBK/water liquid−liquid equilibrium: Measuring and modeling with ePC-SAFT and COSMORS. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2016, 416, 83−93. (7) Landaverde-Cortes, D. C.; Estrada-Baltazar, A.; Iglesias-Silva, G. A.; Hall, K. R. Densities and Viscosities of MTBE + Heptane or Octane at p = 0.1 MPa from (273.15 to 363.15) K. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2007, 52, 1226−1232. (8) Domańska, U.; Ż ołek Tryznowska, Z. Temperature and composition dependence of the density and viscosity of binary mixtures of (hyperbranched polymer, B-U3000 + 1-alcohol, or ether). J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2009, 41, 821−828.

a

Standard uncertainties u are ur(wLiFSI) = 0.025, u(wH2O) = 0.0006 g g , u(T) = 0.1 K, and u(p) = 3 kPa. −1

Figure 5 shows that LiFSI has a strong solubilizing effect on the miscibility gap between MTBE and H2O. An enrichment of LiFSI in the water-rich phase (bottom phase) is observed. This enrichment is to be expected because of the high polarity of water, which results in strong ion-dipole coordination between dissolved ions and water molecules. The strong solubilizing effect and the salt enrichment are reported in the literature for similar systems.6

5. CONCLUSIONS In the present work, the density and shear viscosity of solutions of LiFSI in MTBE were studied at ambient pressure, temperatures of between 273 and 308 K, and mole fractions of LiFSI of up to 0.4 mol mol−1. The solid−liquid equilibrium in the system LiFSI-MTBE was investigated at temperatures of between 273 and 308 K. In addition, the solid−liquid equilibrium in the system LiFSI-MTBE-anisole and the liquid−liquid equilibrium in the system LiFSI-MTBE-H2O E



Article

(9) Montaño, D.; Artigas, H.; Royo, F. M.; Lafuente, C. Experimental and Predicted Viscosities of Binary Mixtures Containing Chlorinated and Oxygenated Compounds. Int. J. Thermophys. 2013, 34, 34−46. (10) Hoga, H.; Tôrres, R. Volumetric and viscometric properties of binary mixtures of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)+alcohol at several temperatures and p = 0.1 MPa: Experimental results and application of the ERAS model. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2011, 43, 1104−1134. (11) Rakshit, S.; Saha, R.; Singha, A.; Seddigi, Z. S. A.; Pal, S. K. Molecular interaction, co-solubilization of organic pollutants and ecotoxicity of a potential carcinogenic fuel additive MTBE in water. J. Mol. Liq. 2013, 180, 235−243. (12) Master, Z. R.; Vaid, Z. S.; More, U. U.; Malek, N. I. Molecular interaction study through experimental and theoretical volumetric, transport and refractive properties of N-ethylaniline with aryl and alkyl ethers at several temperatures. Phys. Chem. Liq. 2016, 54, 223−244. (13) Budeanu, M. M.; Dumitrescu, V. Experimental Study and Correlation Models of the Density and Viscosity of 2-Methoxy-2methylpropane with n-propanol. Rev. Chim. (Bucharest) 2017, 68, 1177−1181.

F


Physicochemical Properties of LiFSI Solutions II: LiFSI with Water

Recommend Documents