Comment/Reply pubs.acs.org/jced
Reply to “Comments on ‘Experimental Measurements of Vapor− Liquid Equilibrium Data for the Binary System of Methanol + 2‑Butyl Acetate, 2‑Butyl Alcohol + 2‑Butyl Acetate and Methyl Acetate + 2‑Butyl Acetate at 101.33 kPa’” Hong-xing Wang,* Jing-jing Xiao, Yan-yi Shen, Chang-shen Ye, Ling Li, and Ting Qiu College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, Fujian, China
W
Table 1. The Vapor Pressures at Different Temperatures
e appreciate the comment from Dr. Wisniak. The comments by J. Wisniak on the paper by Wang et al. provide many constructive suggestions. These comments appear to be reasonable. However, responding to the comment, we would like to draw attention to the following aspects: (1) In our work, the Herington test was employed to verify the reliability of the experimental data. It is well-known that the Herington test is a semiempirical method of the thermodynamics consistency test for the binary VLE data. And the pointto-point test is also a semiempirical method when the parameter, β (eq 1), is not obtained. But as the traditional test method for thermodynamic consistency, these tests have been still applied widely by many researchers.1−10 ⎛ ΔH ⎞ dT β = −⎜ 2 ⎟ ⎝ RT ⎠ dx1
(1)
(2) The criteria, (D − J) < 10, was used in our paper. Dr. Wisniak pointed out this criterion is used incorrectly. However, this criterion appears in many papers. Why? The value of D is always positive, not negative, which is well-known. So, |D| is described as D in some literatures.1,3,4,6 It is clear that D − J < 0 is equivalent to |D| < J. The VLE data will be consistent if D − J < 0 (|D| < J). For lower requirements, D − J < 10 is also used as the criteria of consistent test.3−10 Therefore, the criterion used by Wang et al. is correct. (3) As shown in eq 2, the vapor pressure of 2-butyl acetate was taken directly from a report by Zhang et al.11
■
(2)
1749.60 (T /K) − 49.50
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
273.15 283.15 293.15 303.15 313.15 323.15 333.15 343.15 353.15 363.15 373.15 383.15 385.25
0.04 0.08 0.17 0.33 0.60 1.06 1.77 2.88 4.52 6.90 10.26 14.90 16.18
AUTHOR INFORMATION
*E-mail:
[email protected]. Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Xue, G. F.; Wan, H.; Wang, L. J.; Guan, G. F. Vapor−liquid equilibrium for 2-methyl-1-butanol + ethylbenzene + xylene isomers at 101.33 kPa. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2013, 58, 724−730. (2) Reddy, P.; Benecke, T. P.; Ramjugernath, D. Isothermal(vapour + liquid) equilibria for binary mixtures of disopropyl ether with (methanol, or ethanol, or 1-butanol): Experimental data, correlations, and predicions. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2013, 58, 330−339.
(3)
At atmospheric pressure, the boiling temperature of 2-butyl acetate is 385.25 K. However, the vapor pressure is 16.18 kPa at the temperature of 385.25 K according to eq 3. From Table 1, we can make a conclusion that eq 3 is not correct. © 2013 American Chemical Society
ps/kPa
Corresponding Author
Equation 2 is valid and available, although the form is different from the Antoine equation. So, eq 2 was used in our work. Dr. Wisniak declared the vapor pressures of 2-butyl acetate calculated by eq 2 have little difference with those calculated by eq 3. Then, Dr. Wisnisk used eq 3 to calculate the related parameters. According to eq 3 presented by Dr. Wisniak, the vapor pressures were calculated at different temperatures. The results were shown in Table 1. log10 ps /kPa = 6.41703 −
T/K
(4) The calculation of the activity coefficients involves a number of parameters, such as the second virial coefficients, molar volumes, acentric factors, and the properties of pure component, an so on. Those parameters reported in the literature have been adopted directly. The other parameters were estimated or predicted by various methods of estimation.12−19 Because the parameters from the different literatures are slightly different, the small errors in calculation are a possibility. Rechecking the calculation process shows that the larger errors in principle do not exist.
ln ps = 38.7855 − 6098/T + 4.2398 ln T + 2.1506·10−18T 6
no.
Received: September 16, 2013 Accepted: September 30, 2013 Published: November 13, 2013 3567
dx.doi.org/10.1021/je400840u | J. Chem. Eng. Data 2013, 58, 3567−3568
Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data
Comment/Reply
(3) Gupta, B. S.; Lee, M. J. Isothermal vapor−liquid equilibrium for the binary mixtures of nonane with cyclohexane, toluene, m-xylene, or p-xylene at 101.3 kPa. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2012, 313, 190−195. (4) Tang, G. W.; Ding, H.; Hou, J.; Xu, S. M. Isothermal vapor− liquid equilibrium for binary system of ethyl myristate + ethyl palmitate at 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 kPa. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2013, 347, 8−14. (5) Yang, S. K.; Wang, X. J.; Zhu, Y.; Qiao, M. Y.; Chen, N. Isothermal vapor−liquid equilibrium data for the binary systems of octane with p, o, m-xylene at 20 kPa. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2013, 344, 1− 5. (6) Kamihama, N.; Matsuda, H.; Kurihara, K.; Tochigi, K.; Oba, S. Isobaric vapor−liquid equilibrium for ethanol + water + ethylene glycol and its constituent three binary systems. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2012, 57, 339−344. (7) Gao, D. M.; Zhang, J. L.; Zhu, D. C.; Zhang, H.; Chen, H.; Sun, H.; Shi, J. J. Correlation and prediction for vapor−liquid equilibria of dimethylsulfide−pyridine−N,N-dimethylacetamide multicomponent system. J. Chem. Ind. Eng. (China) 2012, 63 (3), 688−697. (8) Matrinez de la Ossa, E.; Pereyra, C.; Santiago, I. Vapor−liquid equilibrium of ethanol + 2-methyl-1-butanol system. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2003, 48, 14−17. (9) Liu, T.; Wang, Z. R.; Xia, S. Q.; Ma, P. S. Isothermal(vapour + liquid) equilibria for N-formylmorpholine with ethylbenzene, nbutylbenzene, iso-propylbenzene and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene at 101.33 kPa. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2012, 53, 9−15. (10) Peng, Y.; Liang, J.; Ping, L. J.; Mao, J. W.; Zhu, H. Thermodynamic consistency for the vapor−liquid equilibrium data of associating system. Acta Pet. Sin. 2009, 25 (5), 717−724. (11) Zhang, W. L.; Du, W.; Meng, N. Isobaric vapor−liquid equilibrium of hexamethyl disiloxane + sec-butyl acetate system at normal pressure. Energy Procedia 2012, 16, 1078−1083. (12) Spencer, C. F.; Danner, R. P. Improved equation for prediction of saturated liquid density. J. Chem. Eng. Data 1972, 17 (2), 236−241. (13) Campbell, S. W.; Thodos, G. Prediction of saturated-liquid densities and critical volumes for polar and nonpolar substances. J. Chem. Eng. Data 1985, 30, 102−111. (14) Tsonopoulos, C. An empirical correlation of second virial coefficients. AIChE J. 1974, 20, 263−272. (15) David, R. L. Handbook of Chemistry and Physics; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2001. (16) Wang, S. J. Petrochemical Industry Design Manual; Chemical Industry Press: Beijing, 2002. (17) Nicholas, P. C. Industrial Solvents Handbook; Marcel Dekker, Inc: MD, 2003. (18) Poling, B. E.; Prausnitz, J. M.; O’Connell, J. P. The Properties of Gases and Liquids; McGraw-Hill: NewYork, 2001. (19) Cheng, N. L. Solvents Handbook; Chemical Industry Press: Beijing, 2007.
3568
dx.doi.org/10.1021/je400840u | J. Chem. Eng. Data 2013, 58, 3567−3568
