Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

Vaporliquid equilibria and excess properties for methyl tert-butyl

ether (MTBE) containing binary systems
So-Jin Park a, , Kyu-Jin Han a , J. Gmehling b
a

Department of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering, Chungnam National University,

Daejeon 305-764, South Korea
Technische Chemie FB9, Universitt Oldenburg, Postfach 2503, D-26111 Oldenburg, Germany
Received 18 December 2001; accepted 12 February 2002

Abstract
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) is recently widely used in the chemical and petrochemical industry as a nonpolluting octane booster for gasoline and as an organic solvent. The isobaric or isothermal vaporliquid equilibria
(VLE) were determined directly for MTBE + C1 C4 alcohols. The excess enthalpy (HE ) for butane + MTBE
or isobutene + MTBE and excess volume (VE ) for MTBE + C3 C4 alcohols were also determined. Besides, the
infinite dilute activity coefficient, partial molar excess enthalpies and volumes at infinite dilution ( , HE, , VE, )
were calculated from measured data. Each experimental data were correlated with various gE models or empirical
polynomial. 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE); Vaporliquid equilibria; Activity coefficient; Excess molar property; Infinite
dilution; Correlation

1. Introduction
Accurate representation of the chemical activities is not only essential for the design of fluid phase
separation equipment but also helpful information to describe the mixing rules and the extension of the
database for thermodynamic models. The thermodynamic behaviors at infinite dilution have become a
subject of considerable interest in the chemical, petroleum, food and pharmaceutical industries. However,
accurate measurement and prediction of infinite dilute properties still have some problems because it treats
the mixtures containing a very low amount of one component. Sometimes, the simple extrapolation of the
measured physical properties is suggested as a rapid and convenient method, giving reasonable values of
infinite dilute properties; , HE, , VE, , etc.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +82-42-821-5684; fax: +82-42-823-6414.

E-mail address: sjpark@cnu.ac.kr (S.-J. Park).
0378-3812/02/$ see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 8 - 3 8 1 2 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 4 7 - X

400

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

Tertiary-alkyl ethers are low toxic and low polluting oxygenated petrochemical compounds, used as an
octane booster for lead-free or low-leaded gasoline and also increasingly valued as a solvent and a chemical
reactant [1,2]. They are usually being produced by the conversion of alkanol with isoalkene. Therefore,
the fluid phase equilibria, thermodynamic properties and infinite dilute properties for systems containing
tertiary-alkyl ether, alcohols and hydrocarbons are of interest to optimize the manufacturing process or
using them as additives for gasoline. Some investigations were carried out for the methyl tert-butyl ether
(MTBE) + alcohol systems previously [3], but more data are required to develop thermodynamic models
and to understand solution behaviors.
We have carried out a systematic study of phase equilibria and the fundamental thermophysical properties for binary and ternary mixtures for tertiary-alkyl ether compounds, MTBE, tert-amyl methyl ether
(TAME) and ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) [47]. This work is a part of the systematic study for the
systems of MTBE with alcohols or with butane and isobutene, since MTBE is usually synthesized from
methanol and isobutene. The vaporliquid equilibria (VLE) and two different excess properties (HE , VE )
were experimentally determined. These experimental properties were correlated with common gE models or RedlichKister polynomial [8]. The activity coefficient at infinite dilution ( ) was calculated by
second order extrapolation from the calculated activity coefficient, and excess molar properties at infinite
dilution (HE, , VE, ) were also calculated using RedlichKister parameters. The extrapolated activity
coefficients at infinite dilution were compared with the directly measured values by using differential
ebulliometry [9] or calculated values using UNIFAC equation [10].

2. Experimental
2.1. Materials
Commercial grade MTBE and alcohols from Aldrich and Merck were used. They were carefully dried
with Union Carbide type 3 molecular sieves (from Fluka) and then distilled and degassed using a ca. 20
theoretical staged fractionating column. Their purities were more than 99.9 wt.% by gas chromatographic
analysis. Butane and isobutene were supplied from Messer Griesheim GmbH. Their purities were better
than 99.5%. The observed densities () of liquid pure components at 298.15 K are given in Table 1, along
with the published values [1113] for comparison.
2.2. VLE measurement
Recirculating still [14] is a conventional apparatus to determine isobaric VLE. A recently developed
modified headspace gas chromatographic method [5] allows the rapid and precise determination methods
for isothermal VLE. In this work, isobaric VLE for MTBE+methanol and MTBE+ethanol systems were
measured at 101.33 kPa using a Sieg & Rck type recirculator, which is shown in Fig. 1. Isothermal VLE
for systems of MTBE + 1-propanol and MTBE + 1-butanol at 313.15 K were measured with the help of
Hewlett-Packard (HP) 19395A headspace sampler and the HP 5890 gas chromatograph. In the isobaric
method, ca. 250 ml liquid mixture was introduced to the still and a Baratron pressure regulating system
was used to regulate pressure with an accuracy of 0.1 kPa. For the headspace analysis method, about
3 ml of the liquid sample mixture for known composition was added to the glass vial with an accuracy of
1105 g by Mettler Balance. The glass vials were sealed with a teflon/rubber septum and aluminum cap,

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

401

Table 1
Experimental densities () with literature values and Antoine constants of pure components
Chemicals

Supplier

Observed values
MTBE
Methanol
Ethanol
1-Propanol
2-Propanol
1-Butanol
2-Butanol

Aldrich
Merck
Merck
Merck
Aldrich
Merck
Merck

Antoine constantsa

Density () at 298.15 K

0.73533
0.78645
0.78503
0.79948
0.78101
0.80583
0.80256

Literature values
b

0.73530
0.78640c
0.78500c
0.79957c
0.78082c
0.8060d
0.8026d

7.12997
8.08097
8.11220
7.74887
8.00308
7.92484
7.47429

1265.40
1582.27
1592.86
1440.74
1505.50
1617.52
1314.19

242.517
239.970
226.184
198.806
211.600
203.296
186.500

Data from Dortmund Data Bank (DDB, version 1998).

[11].
c
[12].
d
[13].
b

and then kept in the thermostat, the temperature of which was regulated with an accuracy of 0.1 K. After
the equilibrium was achieved, the liquid and vapor phase (in the head space analysis, vapor phase only)
components were then analyzed by gas chromatography. Highly pure He gas (99.9999%) and TCD were
used for analysis. Determination methods and operating procedures have been described previously [57].
2.3. Excess molar enthalpy measurement
The excess molar enthalpies (HE ) for butane + MTBE and isobutene + MTBE mixtures were measured
directly at 363.15 K under 2 103 kPa using the Hart Scientific isothermal flow calorimeter. This flow
calorimeter was equipped with syringe pumps capable of delivering accurately small pulse-free flows. It
also has several advantages over batch calorimeters with which most currently available HE data have
been measured. This flow calorimeter works by monitoring the power required by the control heater to
keep the flow cell under isothermal conditions. The operating procedure is described elsewhere [6].

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram for the recirculating still (Sieg & Rck type).

402

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

2.4. Excess molar volume measurement

The vibrating tube digital densitometry (Anton Paar DMA 602) was employed to determine the densities
of the pure compound and the binary mixtures. The densitometry was calibrated for each measurement
using doubly distilled water and dried air at atmospheric pressure. About 3.5 ml of sample mixtures were
prepared by weight with precisions of 1 105 g. To minimize the experimental error due to evaporation,
4 ml small glass vials were used as mixture vessels. The experimental systematic error was estimated
to be less than 1 104 g/cm3 . All the measurements were carried out under atmospheric pressure.
The temperature of the vibrating U tube was regulated by Lauda thermostat of which the temperature
was calibrated against a HP resistance thermometer with an accuracy of 0.01 K. The time interval of
measurements was chosen to be 15 min to attain a constant temperature and stability in oscillation.
Apparatus and operating procedure are described elsewhere [6,7].
2.5. Calculation of the thermodynamic properties at infinite dilution
The , HE, and VE, are calculated from calculated or measured thermodynamic properties ( ,
H , VE ). The value was obtained by using second order extrapolation program and HE, , VE, were
calculated by the correlated parameters of RedlichKister polynomial [8].
E

3. Results and discussion

For the VLE determination, the simplified VLE Eq. (1) and Antoine Eq. (2) were used. For the headspace
analysis method, true liquid mole fraction must be calculated. The calculation procedure has been previously described [5].
y1 P = x1 1 P1s
log Pis (mmHg) = A

(1)
B
T ( C)

+C

(2)

The excess molar volume of mixing, VE , is defined as

H E = Hm x1 H1 x2 H2



x1 M1 x2 M2
x1 M1 + x2 M2
E

V =
m
1
2

(3)
(4)

The RedlichKister polynomial function was used to correlate the experimental excess molar properties,
ME (HE , VE ).
M E = x1 x2

n

Ai (x1 x2 )i1

(5)

i=1

Standard deviation of the fits, S.D., for excess molar properties is then defined as


E
E
2 1/2
(M

M
)
i
calculated
experimental i
S.D. =
N n

(6)

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

403

Table 2
Vaporliquid equilibria for MTBE with methanol and ethanol mixtures at 101.33 kPa
T (K)

x1

y1

T (K)

x1

y1

T (K)

x1

y1

MTBE + methanol
334.95
0.0378
333.05
0.0694
331.45
0.1077
330.25
0.1438
329.05
0.1807
328.15
0.2217
327.15
0.2772
326.65
0.3061
326.35
0.3279

0.1311
0.2153
0.2850
0.3389
0.3903
0.4213
0.4789
0.5042
0.5184

326.15
325.95
325.65
325.45
325.15
324.95
324.85
324.65
324.55

0.3543
0.3765
0.4051
0.4312
0.4637
0.4998
0.5316
0.5700
0.6098

0.5321
0.5581
0.5571
0.5714
0.5905
0.6085
0.6219
0.6368
0.6563

324.45
324.45
324.55
324.65
324.85
325.35
325.45
326.25
327.55

0.6560
0.7052
0.7659
0.7414
0.8289
0.8520
0.8967
0.9461
0.9915

0.6785
0.7038
0.7346
0.7212
0.7763
0.8002
0.8386
0.9000
0.9807

MTBE + ethanol
351.25
0.0027
348.95
0.0283
346.05
0.0685
343.35
0.1090
341.05
0.1478
339.35
0.1902
337.95
0.2213
337.65
0.2354
337.05
0.2520
336.45
0.2550

0.0130
0.0952
0.2473
0.3479
0.4114
0.4730
0.5120
0.5416
0.5628
0.5801

335.75
335.15
334.65
334.05
333.55
333.05
332.55
332.15
331.55
331.25

0.2980
0.3221
0.3394
0.3460
0.3831
0.4108
0.4434
0.4615
0.5109
0.5433

0.5892
0.6209
0.6350
0.6548
0.6651
0.6812
0.7044
0.7163
0.7361
0.7434

330.75
330.35
329.85
329.45
329.05
328.65
328.35
328.05
327.85
327.75

0.5801
0.6045
0.6505
0.6992
0.7451
0.7880
0.8261
0.8738
0.9173
0.9611

0.7610
0.7754
0.7937
0.8133
0.8326
0.8520
0.8724
0.8982
0.9263
0.9613

E
E
where Mcalculated
is the excess molar property, which is calculated by Eq. (5) and Mexperimental
is the experimental excess property. From the experimental values, the properties at infinite dilution are
calculated.
The partial molar excess enthalpy and volume at infinite dilution were calculated with the adjustable
parameters of the RedlichKister polynomial. The partial molar excess properties at infinite dilution are
the limit of the partial molar excess properties, as shown in Eqs. (7) and (8). In this work, we used
five adjustable parameters of the RedlichKister polynomial.

M 1E, = lim M 1E = A1 A2 + A3 A4 + A5

(7)

M 2E, = lim M 2E = A1 + A2 + A3 + A4 + A5

(8)

x1 0

x1 1

The experimental isobaric or isothermal VLE compositions of MTBE + C1 C4 alcohol systems are
listed in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. The activity coefficients were correlated using common gE models
(Margules, van Laar, Wilson, NRTL, UNIQUAC). The correlation results of the various model equations were almost the same. The best-fitted model parameters and the mean deviations in the vapor
phase, y are given in Table 4, with the extrapolated activity coefficient at infinite dilution. Extrapolated activity coefficients at infinite dilution agreed well with directly measured values by differential ebulliometry [14] or calculated values by UNIFAC equation [10]. The mean deviation, y means
|yexperimental ycalculated |/N , and the parameters Aij for the Wilson, NRTL, and UNIQUAC equations are

404

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

Table 3
Vaporliquid equilibria for MTBE systems with 1-propanol and 1-butanol at 313.15 K
P (kPa)

x1

y1

P (kPa)

x1

y1

P (kPa)

x1

y1

MTBE + 1-propanol
7.65
0.0078
8.58
0.0159
9.26
0.0219
10.00
0.0280
10.74
0.0351
11.24
0.0422
12.31
0.0489
13.21
0.0568
17.92
0.0972
22.89
0.1491
27.13
0.2013

0.1461
0.2443
0.3043
0.3592
0.4075
0.4276
0.4907
0.5291
0.6682
0.7527
0.8012

28.80
33.43
36.45
37.46
38.75
42.11
43.65
43.97
46.76
47.87
49.31

0.2476
0.2980
0.3506
0.3998
0.4419
0.5222
0.5699
0.5826
0.6453
0.6832
0.7365

0.8170
0.8535
0.8722
0.8782
0.8858
0.9047
0.9129
0.9146
0.9290
0.9346
0.9421

51.74
52.56
55.47
57.65
57.89
58.40
58.48
58.61
59.02
59.31
59.62

0.7994
0.8384
0.8890
0.9473
0.9559
0.9669
0.9723
0.9749
0.9858
0.9922
0.9987

0.9550
0.9597
0.9758
0.9864
0.9879
0.9911
0.9917
0.9926
0.9956
0.9977
0.9997

MTBE + 1-butanol
3.19
0.0072
4.48
0.0164
4.62
0.0205
5.59
0.0292
6.59
0.0389
6.89
0.0425
7.28
0.0482
8.15
0.0566
13.07
0.1006
17.17
0.1484
21.14
0.1947

0.2455
0.4689
0.4851
0.5784
0.6459
0.6624
0.6816
0.7182
0.8330
0.8786
0.9061

24.55
27.84
29.62
33.09
36.50
38.74
44.25
43.99
46.09
47.92
49.70

0.2473
0.2965
0.3483
0.3920
0.4615
0.5021
0.5482
0.5925
0.6478
0.6944
0.7598

0.9229
0.9354
0.9413
0.9511
0.9589
0.9636
0.9727
0.9723
0.9757
0.9785
0.9814

51.83
53.49
55.35
54.98
57.49
57.96
58.22
58.46
58.96
59.17
59.56

0.7989
0.8454
0.8935
0.9194
0.9555
0.9670
0.9705
0.9768
0.9864
0.9908
0.9979

0.9848
0.9875
0.9897
0.9904
0.9954
0.9964
0.9969
0.9974
0.9985
0.9990
0.9998

expressed as
Wilson

Aij = ij ii

NRTL

Aij = gij gii

UNIQUAC

(cal/mol)

(9)

(cal/mol)

Aij = uij uii

(10)

(cal/mol)

(11)

Table 4
Fitted gE model parameters and mean deviations of the vapor phase mole fraction and the extrapolated activity coefficient at
infinite dilution
System

gE model

A12

MTBE + methanol
MTBE + ethanol
MTBE + 1-propanol
MTBE + 1-butanol

Wilson
NRTL
UNIQUAC
Wilson

375.56
492.82
769.76
272.90

A21
1090.11
288.76
283.93
958.50

Calculated values by extrapolation.

Unpublished data obtained by differential ebulliometry [14].
c
Calculated values by UNIFAC equation [10].
b

y

0.3

0.0050
0.0068
0.0053
0.0030

3.114a
2.677a
2.315a
1.720a

3.208b
2.850b
2.304c
1.940c

3.526a
3.097a
2.751a
2.958a

3.421b
2.983b
2.912c
2.529c

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

405

Fig. 2. Isobaric VLE data at 101.33 kPa and isothermal VLE data at 313.15 K for the systems of MTBE + n-alcohols(C1 C4 ),
(x: liquid phase, y: vapor phase).

All the measured VLE data were thermodynamically consistent by the RedlichKister integral method.
Fig. 2 shows the isobaric VLE compositions for MTBE + methanol and MTBE + ethanol systems and
isothermal VLE for MTBE + 1-propanol and MTBE + 1-butanol systems. Solid lines represent the data
calculated with the NRTL parameters for MTBE + ethanol system and with UNIQUAC parameters for
MTBE + 1-propanol system and with Wilson parameters for MTBE + methanol and MTBE + 1-butanol
systems. The MTBE +methanol system has a minimum boiling azeotrope, while the other systems do not
show azeotropic behavior. As shown in the figure, MTBE + 1-propanol and MTBE + 1-butanol systems
show relatively large positive deviations from Raoults law.
Table 5 gives the experimental HE data of butane+MTBE and isobutene+MTBE. They were smoothed
by the least-square method to RedlichKister equation. Parts of these data were reported in the International Data Series [15]. Fig. 3 shows the excess molar enthalpies of these binaries. Continuous lines
represent the calculated data by means of Eq. (5). The mixing enthalpies of butane +MTBE mixture show
positive values and are almost symmetric while the isobutene + MTBE mixture show negative values
and the minimum is slightly shifted in the MTBE rich region. Table 6 shows the fitted parameters of the

406

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

Table 5
Excess molar enthalpies of the butane + MTBE and isobutene + MTBE systems at 363.15 K
x1

HE (J/mol)

x1

HE (J/mol)

HE (J/mol)

x1

x1

HE (J/mol)

Butane + MTBE
0.0588
39.18
0.1164
73.83
0.1731
104.13
0.2287
130.42

0.3370
0.4415
0.5425
0.5425

165.63
185.66
191.61
190.31

0.6402
0.7346
0.8259
0.8705

178.05
151.47
114.50
90.06

0.9143
0.9143
0.9575
0.9894

63.27
63.09
32.82
8.19

Isobutene + MTBE
0.0157
2.81
0.0623
11.59
0.1230
22.34
0.1821
32.99

0.2398
0.3510
0.4569
0.5579

41.13
56.05
68.18
75.47

0.5579
0.6543
0.7465
0.7465

74.65
75.70
69.90
70.85

0.8346
0.8773
0.9191
0.9600

57.09
47.16
34.00
18.11

Fig. 3. Excess molar enthalpies of the butane + MTBE and isobutene + MTBE systems at 363.15 K.

RedlichKister equation for each binary and S.D., related to Eq. (6), with the calculated partial excess
molar enthalpy at infinite dilution.
The volume changes of mixing of MTBE with C3 C4 alcohols are given in Table 7 and the values of
fitted RedlichKister parameters Ai and S.D. are presented in Table 8 with the calculated partial excess
Table 6
Fitted parameters, standard deviations (S.D.) and partial excess molar enthalpies at infinite dilution (J/mol) for the butane+MTBE
and isobutene + MTBE systems at 363.15 K
System

A1

A2

A3

A4

Butane + MTBE
762.0684
45.6986 13.9318
10.5542
Isobutene + MTBE 285.9552 142.7336 59.4911 12.4489

A5
18.2889
5.4356

S.D. (J/mol) H 1E,

0.8188
0.4519

H 2E,

710.1727
822.6783
195.6994 506.0644

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

407

Table 7
Excess molar volumes of the MTBE systems with C3 C4 alcohols at 298.15 K
x1

VE (cm3 /mol)

MTBE + 1-propanol
0.0246
0.0807
0.0636
0.1782
0.0993
0.2611
0.1493
0.3653
0.1994
0.4550
0.2482
0.5324
MTBE + 2-propanol
0.0243
0.0378
0.0597
0.0768
0.0996
0.1160
0.1312
0.1408
0.1898
0.1824
MTBE + 1-butanol
0.0208
0.0736
0.0717
0.2049
0.1004
0.2785
0.1497
0.3834
0.2005
0.4837
0.2507
0.5713
MTBE + 2-butanol
0.0322
0.0530
0.0788
0.1214
0.1507
0.2094
0.2015
0.2429
0.2530
0.2844

x1

VE (cm3 /mol)

x1

VE (cm3 /mol)

x1

VE (cm3 /mol)

0.3006
0.3481
0.4067
0.4507
0.5030

0.5902
0.6402
0.6856
0.7103
0.7050

0.5503
0.6008
0.6500
0.7009
0.7366

0.7100
0.7037
0.6784
0.6254
0.5927

0.8001
0.8486
0.8903
0.9343
0.9747

0.5067
0.4090
0.3252
0.2200
0.1077

0.2495
0.3004
0.3484
0.4015
0.4480

0.2201
0.2480
0.2681
0.2722
0.2804

0.4997
0.5509
0.5991
0.6490
0.7009

0.2929
0.2911
0.2727
0.2657
0.2522

0.7505
0.7943
0.8511
0.8968
0.9420

0.2309
0.1976
0.1609
0.1263
0.0889

0.3002
0.3685
0.4031
0.4490
0.4962

0.6460
0.7153
0.7442
0.7551
0.7737

0.5535
0.5977
0.6485
0.6948
0.7479

0.7494
0.7429
0.7295
0.6967
0.6726

0.7997
0.8516
0.9004
0.9325
0.9808

0.5840
0.4893
0.3715
0.2802
0.1043

0.3008
0.3481
0.4043
0.4489
0.4994

0.3243
0.3362
0.3629
0.3762
0.3706

0.5500
0.5981
0.6503
0.6970
0.7499

0.3732
0.3700
0.3596
0.3379
0.2929

0.7962
0.8542
0.9023
0.9395

0.2670
0.2149
0.1547
0.1082

molar volume at infinite dilution. Fig. 4 shows the fitted VE curves, together with the experimental points.
In all the systems, measured VE appear to be negative over the entire range of MTBE concentration.
The curves are approximately symmetric with a minimum at a mole fraction at about 0.5. The negative
deviations from the linear volumetric behavior are assumed to be caused by strong hydrogen bonding or
the different molecular sizes.
Table 8
Fitted parameters, standard deviations (S.D.) and partial excess molar volumes at infinite dilution (cm3 /mol) for the MTBE
systems at 298.15 K
System

A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

S.D. (cm3 /mol)

V1E,

V2E,

MTBE + 1-propanol
MTBE + 2-propanol
MTBE + 1-butanol
MTBE + 2-butanol

2.8648
1.1600
3.0653
1.5100

0.1977
0.0101
0.1687
0.0916

0.1925
0.0134
0.7008
0.1570

0.1433
0.0839
0.8906
0.0165

0.4748
0.4340
0.2977
0.2490

0.0068
0.0048
0.0097
0.0054

3.1911
1.5134
3.0045
1.8409

3.8731
1.7014
5.1231
1.9911

408

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

Fig. 4. Excess molar volumes of the MTBE systems with C3 C4 alcohols at 298.15 K.

4. Conclusion
Isobaric or isothermal VLE for systems of MTBE +C1 C4 alcohols were measured and correlated. The
non-ideality was decreased with increasing carbon number of alcohols wheres the MTBE+methanol system shows azeotropic behavior. Extrapolated infinitely dilute activity coefficients were relatively agreed
well with measured or estimated values by UNIFAC equation. Mixing process of butane + MTBE system
was endothermic while that of isobutene + MTBE system was exothermic. Excess molar volumes of
MTBE + C3 C4 alcohol systems show negative deviation from the ideality because of hydrogen bonding
of alcohols. Partial excess molar properties at infinite dilution were also successively calculated using the
correlated RedlichKister.
List of symbols
A, B, C
Antoine constants
Ai
parameter in the smoothing equation
Aij
parameter used in Margules, van Laar, Wilson, NRTL, UNIQUAC equation
gij
interaction energy in the NRTL equation
E
H
excess molar enthalpy (J/mol)
ME
excess molar property
Mi
molecular weight of component i
n
number of parameters Ai
N
number of experimental values
P
total pressure (kPa)
Pis
vapor pressure of pure component i (kPa)
S.D.
standard deviation
uij
interaction energy in the UNIQUAC equation

S.-J. Park et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 399409

VE
xi
yi

409

excess molar volume (cm3 /mol)

liquid phase mole fraction of component i
vapor phase mole fraction of component i

Greek letters

non-randomness parameter in the NRTL equation

i
activity coefficient of component i
ij
interaction energy in the Wilson equation (cal/mol)
i
density of component i (g/cm3 )
m
density of the binary mixture (g/cm3 )
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by grant no. 2000-1-30700-011-2 from the Basic Research Program of the
Korea Science & Engineering Foundation.
References
[1] F.A. Mato, J. Chem. Eng. Data 36 (1991) 262.
[2] E. Tusel-langer, J.M. Garcia Alonso, M.A. Villamanan Olfos, R.N. Lichtenthaler, J. Sol. Chem. 20 (1991) 153.
[3] J. Gmehling, K. Fischer, J. Menke, J. Rarey, J. Weinert, J. Krafczyk, Dortmund Data Bank (DDB) overview, DDB data
directory, version 2001.
[4] K. Fischer, S.J. Park, J. Gmehling, Int. Electron. J. Phys. Chem. Data 2 (1996) 135.
[5] J.H. Oh, S.J. Park, J. Chem. Eng. Data 42 (1997) 517.
[6] S.J. Park, T.J. Lee, Korean J. Chem. Eng. 12 (1995) 110.
[7] J.H. Oh, S.J. Park, J. Chem. Eng. Data 43 (1998) 1009.
[8] O. Redlich, A.T. Kister, Indian Eng. Chem. 40 (1948) 345.
[9] D.M. Trampe, C.A. Eckert, J. Chem. Eng. Data 36 (1991) 112.
[10] U. Weidlich, J. Gmehling, Indian Eng. Chem. Res. 26 (1987) 1372.
[11] TRC Thermodynamic Tables-Non-Hydrocarbons; Thermodynamics Research Center, The Texas A&M University system
(1973).
[12] C. Pettenati, P. Alessi, M. Fermeglia, I. Kikic, Thermochim. Acta 162 (1990) 203.
[13] J.A. Dean, Handbook of Organic Chemistry, Donelly & Sons Co. (1987).
[14] S.J. Park, Unpublished experimental data (2000).
[15] J. Gmehling, S.J. Park, K. Fisher, B. Meents, Int. Data Ser. 3 (1992) 146.