Isobaric VaporâLiquid Equilibrium for the Extractive Distillation of

Article pubs.acs.org/jced

Isobaric Vapor−Liquid Equilibrium for the Extractive Distillation of Acetonitrile + Water Mixtures Using Dimethyl Sulfoxide at 101.3 kPa Zhigang Zhang, Ming Lv, Donghao Huang, Peng Jia, Dezhang Sun, and Wenxiu Li* Liaoning Provincial Key Laboratory of Chemical Separation Technology, Shenyang University of Chemical Technology, Shenyang 110142, China S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: Vapor−liquid equilibrium (VLE) data for the system formed by acetonitrile, water, and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) at 101.3 kPa are measured in this paper. The data have been correlated by the classical thermodynamic models: Wilson, universal quasichemical activity coefficient (UNIQUAC), and nonrandom two-liquid (NRTL). The results indicate that all of the models can correlate the VLE data successfully and Wilson model performances the best. The effects of DMSO with various contents on the acetonitrile + water system are explored. From the results, the azeotrope is eliminated by DMSO by the means of improving their relative volatility. Hence, DMSO is an effective solvent for separating the acetonitrile + water binary azeotropic system.

■

INTRODUCTION Acetonitrile is an important organic solvent. It is widely used in many fields such as organic synthesis,1 liquid chromatography,2 and photosensitive material.3 Large amounts of acetonitrile are required to be recycled from aqueous waste because of its high toxicity.4 The purification of acetonitrile is very difficult because there is a minimum azeotrope5 in the acetonitrile + water system at certain conditions. Extractive distillation6,7 can be used to separate them by adding an entrainer which improves the relative volatility of the binary system. It is obvious that the selection of a suitable solvent is the key to ensure an effective and economical design of extractive distillation. In previous literature, there had been some typical solvents used to separate the acetonitrile + water mixture such as butyl acetate8 and ethylene glycol.9,10 However, butyl acetate is not easily recycled because of its low boiling point. Ethylene glycol is difficult to mix evenly with the azeotropic mixture, and as an entrainer its dosage is big. Thus, it is necessary to seek a more suitable solvent to replace these traditional solvents. We should select an entrainer which can disrupt the hydrogen bonds because the hydrogen bonds11 play a key role in forming azeotrope in the acetonitrile + water system. While dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) acts as a hydrogen bond breaker, it is significant to investigate the behavior of DMSO as a possible entrainer. The study of vapor−liquid equilibrium (VLE) data is considerably important for the design of extractive distillation process. In this paper, we measured the VLE data of binary systems acetonitrile (1) + water (2), acetonitrile (1) + DMSO (3), water (2) + DMSO (3), and the ternary system acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) at 101.3 kPa. Then, we used three activity coefficient models: Wilson,12 universal quasichemical activity coefficient (UNIQUAC),13 and nonrandom two-liquid (NRTL)14 to correlate the binary experimental data. The correlated parameters of these models and the average absolute deviations are listed in this paper. Then we can © 2013 American Chemical Society

correlate the ternary VLE data of acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) with fewer experimental points by using the appropriate model.

■

EXPERIMENTAL SECTION Chemicals. The chemicals acetonitrile and DMSO were supplied by Sinopharm Group Co. Ltd. Deionized water was provided by our own laboratory which purified by an ionexchanger filter. We checked the purities of chemicals by gas chromatography, and their specifications are summarized in Table 1. We used an Abbe refractometer and vibrating tube Table 1. Specifications of Chemical Samples chemical name acetonitrile water DMSO a

source

initial mass fraction purity

purification method

analysis method

0.9970

none

GCa

Sinopharm Group our laboratory Sinopharm Group

none 0.9990

none

GCa

Gas chromatography.

density meter to measure the refractive indexes and densities. The uncertainties (u) in refractive index and density measurements were 0.0002 and 0.001 g·cm−3, respectively. Their purities, refractive indexes, densities, and boiling points as well as the values from the corresponding literature are listed in Table 2. Apparatus and Procedure. The VLE apparatus was an allglass equilibrium still (NGW, Wertheim, Germany) described by Hunsmann,15 and we used it to measure the VLE data at Received: June 5, 2013 Accepted: November 25, 2013 Published: November 27, 2013 3364

dx.doi.org/10.1021/je400531a | J. Chem. Eng. Data 2013, 58, 3364−3369

Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data

Article

Table 2. Refractive Index nD, Density ρ, and Normal Boiling Point Tb of Pure Components4 ρ(293.15 K)/g·cm−3

nD(293.15 K) component acetonitrile watera DMSOa a

a

Tb(101.3 kPa)/K

exptl

lit.

exptl

lit.

exptl

lit.

1.3425 1.3312 1.4751

1.3413 1.3325 1.4769

0.782 0.998 1.101

0.7819 0.9982 1.1004

354.75 373.15 463.45

354.75 373.15 463.55

Standard uncertainties u are: u(nD) = 0.0002; u(ρ) = 0.001 g·cm−3; u(T) = 0.05 K.

Table 3. Vapor Pressures of Acetonitrile, Water, and DMSO at Different Temperatures acetonitrilea

a

watera

DMSOa

T/K

P/kPa exptl

P/kPa calcd

T/K

P/kPa exptl

P/kPa calcd

T/K

P/kPa exptl

P/kPa calcd

307.22 311.30 314.05 316.73 320.80 323.52 325.80 328.95 330.50 333.02 335.20 338.45 341.17 343.43 346.60 350.67 354.75

18.08 21.45 24.00 26.73 31.35 34.82 37.88 42.59 45.06 49.34 53.31 59.68 65.47 70.59 78.43 89.46 101.64

18.09 21.43 24.01 26.75 31.31 34.78 37.91 42.61 45.07 49.40 53.29 59.67 65.45 70.62 78.40 89.45 101.65

320.37 324.33 326.63 328.29 333.57 340.16 343.85 345.44 347.83 349.40 351.80 354.68 358.64 361.08 362.59 367.87 373.15

10.74 13.09 14.66 15.86 20.33 27.37 32.16 34.40 38.07 40.62 44.82 50.37 58.91 64.72 68.63 83.63 101.31

10.75 13.07 14.64 15.88 20.32 27.40 32.14 34.41 38.04 40.59 44.84 50.35 58.90 64.75 68.65 83.64 101.28

401.95 405.11 408.75 411.45 414.60 419.36 421.15 424.10 430.45 436.75 433.59 436.75 439.92 442.85 447.83 455.74 463.45

15.28 17.11 19.42 21.32 23.72 27.76 29.41 32.35 39.43 47.75 43.43 47.75 52.42 57.05 65.75 81.72 100.76

15.27 17.09 19.43 21.35 23.69 27.80 29.43 32.33 39.46 47.74 43.46 47.74 52.38 57.07 65.72 81.75 100.73

Standard uncertainties u are: u(T) = 0.05 K; u(P) = 0.5 kPa.

equation are shown in Table 3. The Antoine equation is expressed as follows: Bi ln Pi0 = Ai − T + Ci (1)

atmospheric pressure. In each VLE experiment, the pressure was kept at 101.3 ± 0.5 kPa, and the heating system of the liquid mixture was turned on. We took the samples from the vapor and liquid phase respectively after the temperature of the mixture in equilibrium still was maintained in constant for about 30 min. The sampling was carried out with special syringes that allowed the withdrawal of tiny volume samples. Then, samples of vapor and liquid phase were taken for analysis. The sampling was taken every 20 min until the standard deviation of the last five samples was less than 0.002 which verified the equilibrium state of the system. The system temperature was determinated by a quartz thermometer, and the uncertainty of temperature was 0.05 K. The vapor pressure was determinated by a high accuracy pressure controller (MKS, USA), and the uncertainty was evaluated to be 0.5 kPa. Analysis. The compositions of the vapor and liquid phase in equilibrium were analyzed by an Agilent 7890A gas chromatograph (GC) equipped with a 60 m, 0.32 mm i.d., 0.25 μm capillary column and a thermal conductivity cell detector (TCD) for quantification. The column temperature was set from 353 K to 493 K. Injector and detector temperatures were 492 K and 523 K, respectively. We used the relative correction factor to convert the peak area ratio to the mass content of the sample. Every sample was analyzed at least three times, and the average relative deviation in mole fraction was less than 0.002.

where P0 is the equilibrium pressure in kPa and T is equilibrium temperature in K. Antoine parameters16 Ai, Bi, and Ci regressed from experimental values in Table 3 are listed in Table 4. The Table 4. Antoine Parameters of Pure Components components

A

B

C

acetonitrile water DMSO

14.863 16.359 15.120

3373.652 3862.702 4260.383

−25.337 −44.148 −58.182

results show that the vapor pressure matches well with the data from Antoine equation and Yaws et al.17 So we can use the Antoine equation to predict the saturated vapor pressure of the pure component. Experimental VLE Data. The isobaric VLE data for the system formed by acetonitrile (1), water (2), and DMSO (3) are measured at 101.3 kPa. The VLE data consist of equilibrium temperatures, liquid and vapor phase mole compositions, and activity coefficients. All of the binary VLE data are presented in Table S-1 to S-3 in the Supporting Information. It is found that all of the binary systems deviate from ideal behavior, the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) system presents a positive deviation from ideal behavior, and the acetonitrile (1) + DMSO (3) and water (2) + DMSO (3) systems present negative deviations

■

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Pure Component Vapor Pressure. The experimental vapor pressures of the pure components (acetonitrile, water, DMSO) and the corresponding data calculated using Antoine 3365



Article

where xi and yi are liquid and vapor mole fractions, ϕi is the fugacity coefficient of the vapor phase, ϕsi is the saturated fugacity coefficient, vLi is the liquid molar volume, and R is the universal gas constant. The vapor phase can be assumed as ideal gas because of the low enough pressure, which leads to little interaction among molecules. So ϕi and ϕsi are assumed as 1. Since vLi is very small, (p − pi0)vLi / RT is close to 0. Therefore, the equation can safely simplify to:

from ideal behavior. We compare our data with some reported in the literature. The data of acetonitrile (1) + water (2) system are in good agreement with those reported in Acosta et al.18 But, for the acetonitrile (1) + DMSO (3) system, there is a deviation between the data we measured and those reported in Wang et al.19 The VLE data for the ternary system acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) are reported in Table 5. All of the Table 5. Experimental VLE Data for the Ternary System Acetonitrile (1) + Water (2) + DMSO (3) at 101.3 kPa

a

γi =

T/Ka

x1a

y1a

x2

y2

γ1

γ2

γ3

371.85 363.36 359.05 356.14 354.42 353.62 353.32 354.00 355.22 357.57 375.00 369.21 365.18 362.48 359.26 358.26 358.08 358.52 360.62 363.96 381.29 376.10 372.32 369.85 368.44 367.87 368.04 368.98 370.81 373.77

0.007 0.042 0.078 0.131 0.208 0.300 0.448 0.625 0.734 0.838 0.011 0.037 0.066 0.097 0.176 0.249 0.333 0.416 0.568 0.692 0.014 0.049 0.087 0.130 0.177 0.229 0.287 0.352 0.426 0.509

0.109 0.373 0.482 0.551 0.597 0.630 0.674 0.745 0.814 0.924 0.116 0.303 0.419 0.492 0.588 0.637 0.681 0.723 0.818 0.935 0.111 0.306 0.440 0.534 0.605 0.665 0.722 0.782 0.853 0.936

0.947 0.901 0.862 0.805 0.722 0.624 0.466 0.277 0.160 0.049 0.853 0.822 0.788 0.752 0.659 0.574 0.476 0.378 0.200 0.054 0.721 0.675 0.623 0.567 0.504 0.435 0.357 0.271 0.173 0.061

0.891 0.626 0.518 0.449 0.402 0.370 0.326 0.255 0.185 0.075 0.883 0.696 0.581 0.507 0.411 0.362 0.318 0.275 0.180 0.060 0.882 0.688 0.555 0.461 0.390 0.330 0.272 0.210 0.136 0.047

9.249 6.902 5.420 4.014 2.888 2.169 1.570 1.216 1.090 1.008 5.841 5.256 4.606 3.992 2.897 2.293 1.842 1.543 1.200 1.019 3.634 3.350 2.991 2.618 2.269 1.958 1.686 1.449 1.241 1.048

0.985 0.997 1.017 1.058 1.132 1.244 1.483 1.906 2.279 2.757 0.969 0.976 0.986 1.000 1.047 1.101 1.175 1.260 1.432 1.553 0.922 0.919 0.917 0.917 0.918 0.919 0.916 0.902 0.860 0.745

0.196 0.135 0.109 0.096 0.094 0.104 0.137 0.222 0.323 0.499 0.266 0.220 0.194 0.180 0.176 0.190 0.222 0.269 0.415 0.646 0.388 0.355 0.340 0.342 0.357 0.387 0.435 0.508 0.622 0.805

N

OF =

⎛ T exptl − T cal i i ⎝

⎞ + |yiexptl − yical |⎟⎟ ⎠

Tiexptl

(4)

The equilibrium temperatures of the binary and ternary system are correlated with the function proposed by Tamir and Wisniak:22 m

T = xiTi + xjTj + xixj ∑ Ck(xi − xj)k

(5)

k=0

and m

3

T=

∑ xiTi + ∑ [xixj ∑ Ck(xi − xj)k ] i=1

k=0

+ x1x 2x3[A + B(x1 − x 2) + C(x1 − x3)]

(6)

where Ti and Tj are boiling temperatures of pure components i and j, respectively, Ck is the binary parameter of the system, m is the number of the binary parameters, and A, B, C, and D are ternary parameters of the system. We determine all of the parameters by the least-squares method. All of the parameters including the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) and the average absolute deviation (AAD) of the system are summarized in Table 6. The interaction parameters of these three models determined by the regression of the binary data are listed in Table 7, as well as the average absolute deviation of the equilibrium temperature and vapor phase mole fractions between the experimental and the calculated values. From the table, it can be seen that all of the three models can represent the VLE data successfully, but for the ternary system, the Wilson model is the best with the AADT < 0.4 K and the AADy < 0.005. The experimental data correlated by these models are shown in Figures 1 to 3. From the smoothed curve correlation by the Wilson model in Figure 1, there is a minimum azeotropic point at about x1 = 0.714 and azeotropic temperature T = 349.85 K

ϕiPyi exp[viL(P − Pi0)/RT ]

(3)

∑ ⎜⎜ i=1

binary and ternary experimental VLE data comply with thermodynamic consistency by the Wisniak L−W test20 (0.92 < Li/Wi < 1.10) and the McDermott−Ellis test21 (D < Dmax), so we can consider that the data are reliable. The activity coefficients γi are calculated with the following equation: Pi0xiϕis

Pi0xi

Correlation of VLE Data. We correlate the data by Wilson, UNIQUAC, and NRTL models. The parameters of these models are obtained from the regression of the binary data. The binary interaction parameters are determined by minimizing the objective function (OF) as follows:

Standard uncertainties u are: u(T) = 0.05 K; u(x) = u(y) = 0.002.

γi =

Pyi

(2)

Table 6. Binary Parameters, Ternary Parameters, and the Correlation Statistics by the Tamir−Wisniak Equation system i + j 1 1 2 1 a

+ + + +

2 3 3 2+3

C0

C1

C2

C3

A

−49.45 −124.47 −75.44

13.50 109.00 12.11

−124.52 −43.86 −31.80

130.42 −50.07 27.00 −31.71

B

−15.36

C

AADTa/K

RMSDb/K

7.45

0.14 0.07 0.09 0.20

0.08 0.05 0.06 0.13

b N exptl 2 0.5 Average absolute deviation of temperature: 1/N(∑Ni=1|Texptl − Tcal − Tcal i i |). Root-mean-square deviation: 1/N{∑i=1(Ti i ) } .

3366



Article

Table 7. Parameters of the Models for Wilson, NRTL, and UNIQUAC and Their Correlation Statistics model Wilson

NRTL

UNIQUAC

a

system i+j 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1

+ + + + + + + + + + + +

2 3 3 2 + 3a 2 3 3 2 + 3a 2 3 3 2 + 3a

α

Aij

Aji

Bij/K

Bji/K

−0.8487 −20.2286 −1.2151

1.0158 68.3238 0.2525

−470.3277 −1015.2792 786.9583

−646.7770 1176.5137 −47.4187

−0.2578 2.6638 10.0566 −0.3168 110.9789 −0.2404

1.3112 −3.9714 2.7358 0.226 4.8931 −4.1912

256.4588 −1657.9814 −2014.3927 37.3768 −3046.8783 284.0051

283.4087 3093.8406 −1976.0251 −329.0531 −2395.7561 1600.2248

0.3 0.3 0.3

AADT/K

AADy1b

0.11 0.21 0.26 0.39 0.33 0.17 0.25 0.56 0.37 0.21 0.38 0.63

0.0018 0.0031 0.0045 0.0039 0.0015 0.0065 0.0039 0.0023 0.0056

AADy2b

0.0034 0.0037

0.0026 0.0048

0.0035 0.0054

Ternary estimation from the binary parameters. bAverage absolute deviation of vapor mole fraction.

Figure 1. Isobaric VLE data for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) system at 101.3 kPa: ●, experimental data; ···, Wilson; ---, UNIQUAC; , NRTL.

Figure 3. Isobaric VLE data for the water (2) + DMSO (3) system at 101.3 kPa: ●, experimental data; ···, Wilson; ---, UNIQUAC; , NRTL.

Figure 2. Isobaric VLE data for the acetonitrile (1) + DMSO (3) system at 101.3 kPa: ●, experimental data; ···, Wilson; ---, UNIQUAC; , NRTL. Figure 4. Isobaric VLE data for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) ternary system at 101.3 kPa: −, vapor mole fraction for acetonitrile; ---, vapor mole fraction for water.

for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) binary system. Figure 4 shows the equilibrium compositions of the vapor−liquid phase for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) ternary system, and Figure 5 shows the equilibrium temperatures for the ternary system. The experimental VLE data are correlated by the Wilson modelm and they match well with the correlated data. Solvent Effects. In Figures 6 to 8, the experimental and calculated VLE data for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) system at 101.3 kPa are plotted on a solvent-free basis for x3 ≈ 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6. Figure 9 shows the (y1−x′1) equilibrium diagram of the ternary system. From the figures, we

can observe that DMSO produces a strong solvent effect on the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) system. When the mole fraction of DMSO is about 0.4, the azeotrope has already been broken. The relative volatilities of acetonitrile (1) to water (2) at different mole fractions of DMSO are depicted in Figure 10. The relative volatility is calculated by the following equation: 3367



Article

Figure 8. Temperature−composition diagram for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) system at 101.3 kPa with x3 ≈ 0.6: ○, y1 experimental; ●, x′1 experimental; solid lines, calculated by Wilson; ---, x3 = 0.

Figure 5. Equilibrium temperature for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) ternary system at 101.3 kPa.

Figure 9. Isobaric VLE data on a solvent-free basis for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) system at 101.3 kPa: , x3 ≈ 0.0; −○−, x3 ≈ 0.2; −■−, x3 ≈ 0.4; −▲−, x3 ≈ 0.6.


Figure 10. Relative volatility α of acetonitrile (1) to water (2) with the acetonitrile mole fraction x′1 at 101.3 kPa for different mole fractions of DMSO: −○−, x3 ≈ 0.2; −■−, x3 ≈ 0.4; −▲−, x3 ≈ 0.6; ---, x3 = 0.0.


α=

acetonitrile to water when the mole fraction of acetonitrile is about 0.7 where close to the azeotropic composition. The reason is chiefly as followa. DMSO is a kind of strong polar aprotic solvent. It can form much stronger hydrogen bonds with water than those existed in the acetonitrile−water system. Then the hydrogen bonds between acetonitrile and water will suffer damages, and the azeotrope can be broken by this way. Figure 11 is the residue curve simulated with the Wilson model by Aspen Plus at 101.3 kPa. From the figure, all of the residue

y1 /y2 x′1 /x′2

(7)

where x′1 and x′2 are the mole compositions of acetonitrile and water based on solvent-free in the liquid phase and y1 and y2 are the mole compositions in the vapor phase. From the figure, we can see that DMSO effectively improves the relative volatility of 3368



■

curves begin from the acetonitrile−water binary azeotropic point and terminate to the water−DMSO interface, which means that the water and DMSO mixture will be obtained in the bottom and acetonitrile gotten in the distillate.

■

CONCLUSIONS In our study, isobaric VLE data for binary systems acetonitrile (1) + water (2), acetonitrile (1) + DMSO (3), water (2) + DMSO (3), and the ternary system acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) are measured at 101.3 kPa and correlated by the Wilson, UNIQUAC, and NRTL models, respectively. We realize that all of the three models can correlate the VLE data successfully, and the Wilson model shows slightly better results than others. The effects of DMSO on phase equilibrium of the acetonitrile−water system are explored to confirm that DMSO can effectively improve the relative volatility of acetonitrile to water and break the azeotrope. In comparison with other literature data,8−10 the result shows that DMSO produces a greater solvent effect. Although DMSO readily penetrates the skin and it has an unacceptable odor, its good selectivity and lower viscosity make it possible to say that DMSO is a good entrainer to separate acetonitrile + water system by extractive distillation. The VLE data are also very important for designing the extractive distillation process. ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

Tables S-1, S-2, and S-3: Experimental VLE data for acetonitrile (1) + water (2), acetonitrile (1) + DMSO (3), and water (2) + DMSO (3) at 101.3 kPa. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

■

REFERENCES

(1) Xu, K. X. Handbook of fine organic chemical raw materials and intermediates, 2nd ed.; Chemical Industry Press: Beijing, 2002. (2) Rosen, J.; Hellenas, K.-E. Analysis of acrylamide in cooked foods by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Analyst 2002, 127, 880−882. (3) Srinivasu, M. K.; Raju, A. N.; Reddy, G. O. Determination of lovastatin and simvastatin in pharmaceutical dosage forms by MEKC. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2002, 29, 715−721. (4) Cheng, N. Solvents Handbook,3rd ed.; Chemical Industry Press: Beijing,2002. (5) Gmehling, J.; Menke, J.; Krafczyk, J.; Fischer, K. Azeotropic Data; VCH: Weinheim, 1994. (6) Walas, S. M. Phase equilibria in chemical engineering; Butterworth: Boston, 1985. (7) Doherty, M. F.; Malone, M. F. Conceptual Design of Distillation Systems; McGraw-Hill: New York, 2001. (8) Acosta, J.; Rodríguez, I.; Jáuregui, U.; Nuevas, L.; Pardillo, E. Recovery of acetonitrile from aqueous waste by a combined process: Solvent extraction and batch distillation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2006, 52, 95−101. (9) Cui, X. B.; Li, Y.; Feng, T. Y.; Sun, G. X.; Lin, L. Separation of acetonitrile and water by saline extractive distillation. Petrochem. Technol. 2007, 36, 1229−1233. (10) Zhou, J. B.; Cui, X. B.; Dong, B. L.; Wang, Y. F.; Chen, Z. K. Separation of acetonitrile and water mixture by batch extractive distillation. Chem. Ind. Eng. 2009, 26, 482−486. (11) Mountain, R. D. Microstructure and Hydrogen Bonding in Water - Acetonitrile Mixtures. J. Phys. Chem. B 2010, 114, 16460− 16464. (12) Wilson, G. M. A New Expression for the Excess Free Energy of Mixing. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1964, 86, 127−130. (13) Abrams, D. S.; Prausnitz, J. M. Statistical thermodynamic of liquid mixtures: a new expression for the excess Gibbs energy of party or completely miscible systems. AIChE J. 1975, 21, 116−128. (14) Renon, H.; Prausnitz, J. M. Local compositions in thermodynamic excess functions for liquid mixtures. AIChE J. 1968, 14, 135−144. (15) Hunsmann, W. Verdampfungsgleichgewicht von Ameisensa “ure/Essigsa” ure-und von Tetrachlorko hlenstoff/Perchlor̈a thylenGemi-schen. Chem. Ing. Tech. 1967, 39, 1142−1145. (16) Rowley, R. L.; Widling, W. V.; Marshall, T. L.; Daubert, T. E.; Danner, R. P.; Adams, M. E. Physical and Thermodynamic Properties of Pure Chemicals; Taylor & Francis: Bristol, 1989. (17) Yaws, C. L. Chemical properties handbook: physical, thermodynamic, environmental, transport, safety, and health related properties for organic and inorganic chemicals; World Publishing Corporation: Beijing, 1999. (18) Acosta, J.; Arce, A.; Rodil, E.; Soto, A. A thermodynamic study on binary and ternary mixtures of acetonitrile, water and butyl acetate. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2002, 203, 83−98. (19) Wang, Q. Y.; Zeng, H.; Song, H.; Liu, Q. S.; Yao, S. Vapor− Liquid Equilibria for the Ternary System Acetonitrile + 1-Propanol + Dimethyl Sulfoxide and the Corresponding Binary Systems at 101.3 kPa. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2010, 55, 5271−5275. (20) Wisniak, J. A new test for the thermodynamic consistency of vapor-liquid equilibrium. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1993, 7, 1531−1533. (21) McDermott, C.; Ellis, S. R. M. A multicomponent consistency test. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1965, 4, 293−296. (22) Wisniak, J.; Tamir, A. Correlation of the boiling points of mixtures. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1976, 8, 631−635.

Figure 11. Residue curve map for the acetonitrile (1) + water (2) + DMSO (3) ternary system.

■

Article

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*Fax: 86-24-89383736. E-mail: [email protected]. Funding

This project was financed by the National Science Foundation of China (project no. 21076126) and Program for Liaoning Excellent Talents in University (LR2012013). Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest. 3369


Isobaric VaporâLiquid Equilibrium for the Extractive Distillation of

Recommend Documents

Isobaric VaporâLiquid Equilibrium for the Extractive Distillation of