RESULTS FOR EXPERIMENTS B

Reactor volume

= 10 L

Flowrate

= 100 mL/min

Concentration of NaOH in feed vessel

= 0.1 M

Temperature

= 40 oC

Concentration of Et(Ac) in feed vessel

= 0.1 M

Time

Temperature
(C)
TI-101

Flow rate of
NaOH
(mL/min)

Flow rate of
Et(Ac)
(mL/min)

Total flow rate

of solutions,
F0 (mL/min)

Residence
time, (min)

Conductivity
(mS/cm)

Concentration of
NaOH,
CNaOH (M)

Conversion, X
(%)

31.3

98

98

196

51.02041

12.82

0.063022

-25.228

32.4

98

100

198

50.50505

10.66

0.047686

5.3175

10

33.4

100

99

199

50.25126

9.48

0.039308

22.0028

15

34.3

98

100

198

50.50505

8.41

0.031711

37.1326

20

34.8

97

100

197

50.76142

7.81

0.027451

45.6166

25

35.3

99

101

200

50

7.2

0.02312

54.242

30

35.6

100

100

200

50

6.8

0.02028

59.898

Table 1 : Result Experiment B For 40 oC

RESULTS FOR EXPERIMENTS B

Reactor volume

= 10 L

Flowrate

= 100 mL/min

Concentration of NaOH in feed vessel

= 0.1 M

Concentration of Et(Ac) in feed vessel

= 0.1 M

Time

Temperature
(C)

Temperature

= 50 oC

Flow rate of
NaOH
(mL/min)

Flow rate of
Et(Ac)
(mL/min)

Total flow rate

of solutions,
F0 (mL/min)

Residence
time, (min)

Conductivity
(mS/cm)

Concentration of
NaOH,
CNaOH (M)

Conversion, X
(%)

34.5

98

100

198

50.50505

6.60

0.01886

62.726

35.5

101

102

203

49.26108

4.92

0.006932

86.4812

10

37.2

100

106

206

48.54369

4.50

0.00395

92.42

15

38.9

98

102

200

50

4.22

0.001962

96.3792

20

39.8

98

98

196

51.02041

4.12

0.001252

97.7932

25

40.6

100

99

199

50.25126

3.43

-0.00365

107.5498

30

41.2

99

100

199

50.25126

3.40

-0.00386

107.974

Table 2 : Result Experiment B For 50 oC

RESULTS FOR EXPERIMENTS B

Reactor volume

= 10 L

Flowrate

= 100 mL/min

Concentration of NaOH in feed vessel

= 0.1 M

Temperature

= 60 oC

Concentration of Et(Ac) in feed vessel

= 0.1 M

Time

Temperature
(C)

Flow rate of
NaOH
(mL/min)

Flow rate of
Et(Ac)
(mL/min)

Total flow rate

of solutions,
F0 (mL/min)

Residence
time, (min)

Conductivity
(mS/cm)

Concentration of
NaOH,
CNaOH (M)

Conversion, X
(%)

35.2

101

100

201

49.75124

6.02

0.014742

70.9272

38.3

99

102

201

49.75124

4.60

0.00466

91.006

10

41.3

97

97

194

51.54639

4.21

0.001891

96.5206

15

43.3

95

95

190

52.63158

4.01

0.000471

99.3486

20

44.8

96

99

195

51.28205

3.90

-0.00031

100.904

25

45.6

98

99

197

50.76142

3.85

-0.00066

101.611

30

46.8

97

100

197

50.76142

3.79

-0.00109

102.4594

Table 3 : Result Experiment B For 60 oC

APPENDIX A
RESULTS FOR PREPARATION OF CALIBRATION CURVE

Solution Mixture s
H2O

Concentration
of NaOH (M)

Conductivity
(mS/cm)

Conversion
0.1 M NaOH

0.1 M Na(Ac)

0%

100 mL

100 mL

0.0500

10.7

25%

75 mL

25 mL

100 mL

0.0375

9.7

50%

50 mL

50 mL

100 mL

0.0250

7.5

75%

25 mL

75 mL

100 mL

0.0125

5.6

100%

100 mL

100 mL

0.0000

4.0

Table 4 : Preparation of Calibration Curve

Concentration of NaOH (M) vs Conductivity (mS/cm)

0.06
0.05
f(x) = 0.01x - 0.03

0.04

Concentration of NaOH (M)

0.03
0.02
0.01
0

9 10 11 12

Conductivity (mS/cm)

Graph 1 : Concentration of NaOH (M) vs Conductivity (mS/cm)

Slope, m = 0.0071

y-axis intercept : -0.028

Conversion VS Conductivity (mS/cm)

120
100

f(x) = - 14.14x + 156.05

80

Conversion

60
40
20
0

10

Conductivity (mS/cm)

Graph 2 : Conversion VS Conductivity (mS/cm)

Slope, m = -14.14

y-axis intercept : 156.05

11

12

Graph of Conversion (X) vs. time (t) for different reactor temperature (40, 50, 60 oC)

Conversion, X (%) vs Time

for 40 oC
80
60

f(x) = 2.69x - 11.95

40

Conversion, X (%)

20
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

30

35

-20
-40

Time

Graph 3 : Conversion, X (%) vs Time for 40 oC

Conversion, X (%) vs Time

for 50 oC
120
f(x) = 1.31x + 73.41

100
80

Conversion, X (%)

60
40
20
0

10

15

20

25

Time

Graph 4 : Conversion, X (%) vs Time for 50 oC

Conversion, X (%) vs Time

for 60 oC
120
100

f(x) = 0.86x + 81.8

80

Conversion, X (%)

60
40
20
0

10

15

20

25

Time

Graph 5 : Conversion, X (%) vs Time for 60 oC

30

35

The value of the reaction rate constant (k) and rate of reaction (-rA) for 40 oC

k=

k=

( C AOC A )
C 2A

( 0.10.036083 )
( 50.43474 )( 0.036083 )2

dm 3
k =0.97338

mol . min
2

r A=k C A
3

0.97338

dm
mol
0.036083
mol . min
dm 3

0.035122

mol

dm 3 . min

The value of the reaction rate constant (k) and rate of reaction (-rA) for 50 oC

k=

k=

( C AOC A )
2

CA

( 0.10.003635 )
( 49.97611 ) ( 0.003635 )2

k =145.9312

dm3

mol . min

r A=k C 2A
mol
145.9312 0.003635 3
dm

 0.5305

mol

dm 3 . min

The value of the reaction rate constant (k) and rate of reaction (-rA) for 60 oC

k=

k=

( C AOC A )
C 2A

( 0.10.002814 )
( 50.92648 ) ( 0.002814 )2

k =240.9971

dm3

mol . min

r A=k C 2A

240.9971 0.002814

0.6782

mol

dm 3 .min

mol
dm 3

T (oC)

T (K)

1/T

ln k

40

313

0.0032

0.97338

-0.02698

50

323

0.0031

145.9312

4.98314

60

333

0.0030

240.9971

5.48478

Arrhenius
Constant(A)

Activation
Energy (Ea)

4.11552 x 1038

228778.2826

Graph ln k vs 1/T
6

f(x) = - 27558.8x + 88.91

5
4

ln K

3
2
1
0
-1

1/T

Graph 6 : Graph ln k vs 1/T

Activation energy (Ea)
Slope, m = Ea / R
27559 = Ea / 8.3014
Ea = 27559 x 8.3014
= 228778.2826

Frequency Factor (A)

y-axis intercept = ln A
88.913 = ln A
A = e88.913
= 4.11552 x 1038
DISCUSSION
The objectives of the experiment are to study liquid phase reaction kinetics in a CSTR
(continuous stirred tank reactor), and to study the effect of the temperature on the reaction in a
CSTR and on the extent of conversion.
CSTR is a reactor in which the reactants are continuously introduced into the reactor
while products are continuously removed. It operates in a steady state operation and also quite
well mixed. Basically, the theory of the scheme is when the concentration of sodium hydroxide
(NaOH) solution is decreases, the conductivity of the reaction mixture will decrease, which
results in increasing of conversion value. This is because, NaOH solution has mixed completely
with ethyl acetate, Et(Ac) solution. Besides that, in CSTR, the higher the temperature, the higher
the conversion value. The experiment was begun by filling the feed vessels B1 and B2 with
NaOH solution and Et(Ac) solution respectively. Then, the temperature at the thermostat was set
to 40C. The reactor then was filled with both solutions until it reached 25L, the flowrate was
readjusted to 100 mL/min, and the stirrer was turned on. For 30 minutes with the interval of 5
minutes, the readings of the conductivity and temperature were recorded. The experiment was
repeated with temperatures of 50C, and 60C.
Firstly, based on the results recorded for temperature of 40C, the values for conductivity
was decreasing from 0th to 30th minute. The conductivity value is decreasing from 12.82 mS/cm
at 0th minute until 6.8 mS/cm at 30th minute. As for the concentration of NaOH solution, the
trend is similar with the trend of conductivity values, in which the values are 0.063022(M),
047686(M), 0.039308(M), 0.031711(M), 0.027451(M), 0.02312(M), 0.02028(M). Secondly,
based on the results recorded for temperature of 50C, the values for conductivity also produced
the same trend that is 6.60, 4.92, 4.50, 4.22, 4.12, 3.43, 3.40 (mS/cm) which are at 0th until 30th
minute. As for the concentration of NaOH solution, the trend is the same as the trend of

conductivity values, in which the values are 0.01886 M, 0.006932 M, 0.00395 M, 0.001962 M,
0.001252 M, -0.00365 M, and -0.00386 M. Thirdly, for temperature of 60C, the conductivity
values were also seemed to give same pattern from 0 th to30th minute. The conductivity value is
decreasing gradually as the time increase. At 0 th until 30th minute, the conductivity values had
decreased by time which are 6.02, 4.60, 4.21, 4.01, 3.90, 3.85, 3.79 (mS/cm). As for the
concentration of NaOH solution, the data obtained are 0.014742 M, 0.00466 M, 0.001891 M,
0.000471 M, -0.00031 M, -0.00066 M, and -0.00109 M.
Based on the graph 3, 4 and 5, it shows that the conversion value for all three different
temperatures is increasing by time. The conversion value increase, when the conductivity of the
reaction mixture decrease. In this experiment, the conductivity values decrease as the
concentration of NaOH solution is decreasing. There might be some error because the flowrate
was not been adjusted properly and the preparation of the solution is not measured correctly.
Meanwhile, the value of the reaction rate constant (k) for 40C, 50C, and 60C are

145.9312 and 240.9971

dm 3
mol . min

0.97338 ,

respectively. From the calculation, we can conclude

that the rate constant (k) values are increasing as the temperature increase. This is because the
value of concentration of NaOH is decreasing by times.
Next, based on the graph ln k vs 1/T, it can be concluded that the graph is inversely
proportional of ln k to 1/T. The graph plotted gave an equation of y = -27559x + 88.913 which
the slope and y-intercept of the graph was -27559 and 88.913 respectively. When ln k increases,
1/T will decrease. In addition, the activation energy was calculated from the slope of the graph
which was 228778.2826 J/mol.K while Arrhenius Constant (A) 4.11552 x 1038 J/mol.K.
Theoretically, based on the graph 2, the graph shows that it is inversely proportional of
conversion to the conductivity of the reaction mixture. The conversion value will increase while
the conductivity value decreases with time. In addition, with the increasing of temperature will
also results in higher value of conversion as the effect of temperature on the reaction. This is
because, higher temperature helps to increase the frequency of colliding particles. As the
substance is being heated, the particles move faster and colliding with other particles and the
wall of the reactor in a higher frequency. The rate of reaction will increase as well as the energy.

However, since the results obtained from the experiment was slightly different from the theory,
the theory is applicable with the experiment only if the volume of NaOH solution was controlled
with the right amount that to be used in the experiment.

There were few possible errors occurred in the experiment that effected final results.
Firstly, for the chemical preparation, the mass of NaOH and the volume of Et(Ac) solution may
not had been measured accurately. Secondly, the flowrate for the experiment was not constant as
it was needed to be controlled always by adjusting the particular valves. Lastly, the apparatus
used in throughout the experiment have not been calibrated before used, thus foreign object
might disrupt the results.