1.

0 SUMMARY

The objectives of the experiment are to determine the effect of residence time on the
conversion in a PFR and the effect of temperature on the conversion in a PFR. The
experiment was started by mixing 200 g of sodium hydroxide, NaOH with distilled water and
500 ml of ethyl acetate, EtAc in a 50 L reactor. A 150 ml/min flowrate is set to measure
residence time, inlet and outlet concentration, and conversion based on conductivity
recorded, then continued for flowrate of 250 ml/min. Residence time showed the highest
time at highest conversion, which is 5.017 min for 150 ml/min at 32% conversion while at
conversion of 51.3%, residence time for flowrate 250 ml/min is 3.006 min. Residence time
does affect the rate of reaction. The results obtained for flowrate 150 ml/min was fluctuated
at first due to instability of equipment but gradually increasing until minute 30 but for flowrate
250 ml/min, the results was gradually decreasing. The reactant was inefficiently being
converted due to some errors such as the reading was taken for 30 minutes instead of 1
hour. So, the reading was unable to show a stable result. Next, the water flowed from a pipe
that filled in the reactor might be a corroded water. Lastly, the bubble might appear in the
PFR where it can affect the results since PFR only use liquid.
2.0 DATA AND RESULTS

Table 1.0 Table of Calibration Curve

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

0.0500 10.7

0.0375 9.7

0.0250 7.5

0.0125 5.6

0.0000 4.0

Concentration of NaOH (M) vs Conductivity

(mS/cm)
12.0
y = 140x + 4
10.0 R² = 0.9898
Conductivity (mS/cm)

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0
0.0000 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0600
Concentration of NaOH (M)

Figure 1.0 Graph of Calibration Curve of Concentration of NaOH (M) vs Conductivity

(mS/cm)
 Conversion, X (%) vs Reaction Time, t (min)
60

50
Conversion, X (%)

40

30 150 mL/min
250 mL/min
20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Reaction Time, t (min)

Figure 2.0 Graph of Conversion, X (%) versus Reaction time, t (min)

 Reactor volume = 1.5 L

Temperature = 33oC

Flowrate = 150 mL/min

Table 2.0 Table of Result for 150 ml/min Flowrate

Flowrate Flowrate
Total flowrate Inlet Outlet
of of Residence Inlet Outlet
Time Temperature of solutions, F0 concentration concentration Conversion,
NaOH, Et(Ac), time, τ conductivity conductivity
(min) (oC) (mL/min) = of NaOH, of NaOH, X (%)
FNAOH FET (min) (mS/cm) (mS/cm)
FNAOH + FET CNAOH (M) CNAOH (M)
(mL/min) (mL/min)
Inlet Outlet
0 32.9 32.6 149 148 297 5.051 12.25 0.059 11.19 0.051 12.85
5 33.0 32.5 150 150 300 5.000 12.80 0.063 12.15 0.058 7.39
10 33.1 32.6 150 148 298 5.034 12.70 0.062 11.42 0.053 14.71
15 33.1 32.7 151 152 303 4.950 12.48 0.061 10.79 0.049 19.93
20 33.2 32.8 150 150 300 5.000 12.05 0.058 10.16 0.044 23.48
25 33.3 32.9 148 151 299 5.017 12.19 0.059 9.57 0.040 32.00
30 33.3 32.9 150 149 299 5.017 12.80 0.063 9.02 0.036 42.96
F0,avg= 299.43 τavg= 5.010
 Reactor volume = 1.5 L

Temperature = 33oC

Flowrate = 250 mL/min

Table 3.0 Table of Result for 250 ml/min Flowrate

Total
Flowrate
Flowrate flowrate of Inlet Outlet
of Residence Inlet Outlet
Time Temperature of NaOH, solutions, concentration concentration Conversion,
o
Et(Ac), time, τ conductivity conductivity
(min) ( C) FNAOH F0 (mL/min) of NaOH, of NaOH, X (%)
FET (min) (mS/cm) (mS/cm)
(mL/min) = FNAOH + CNAOH (M) CNAOH (M)
(mL/min)
FET
Inlet Outlet
0 33.3 33 250 249 499 3.006 13.65 0.069 8.7 0.034 51.30
5 33.4 33.1 245 256 501 2.994 14.57 0.076 9.45 0.039 48.44
10 33.4 33.1 248 247 495 3.030 13.74 0.070 9.34 0.038 45.17
15 33.4 33.2 249 250 499 3.006 13.06 0.065 9.37 0.038 40.73
20 33.3 33.2 253 250 503 2.982 13.39 0.067 9.48 0.039 41.64
25 33.3 33.2 249 250 499 3.006 13.32 0.067 9.46 0.039 41.42
30 33.4 33.2 249 252 501 2.994 13.27 0.066 9.3 0.038 42.83
F0,avg=499.57 τavg=3.003
3.0 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

The objective of this experiment is to study the effect of residence time on the
reaction in Plug Flow Reactor (PFR). The PFR is known as a type of reactor that operated at
steady state which consist of a cylindrical tube. Usually the PFR works by introducing the
feed from the end of a cylindrical tube and it flows continuously through the length of the
reactor as a series of plugs. In this experiment the saponification of ethyl acetate in the
presence of sodium hydroxide were carry out and these two solutions react together in the
PFR.

This experiment was conducted by running up the equipment and let the
saponification process occurs in present of sodium hydroxide and ethyl acetate. The
manipulated variable for this experiment was the flowrate of materials by adjusted the valve
until the desired flowrate was achieved which were 150 ml/min and 250 ml/min. Next, the
data was observed and recorded every five minutes. Based on the collected data, the
reaction rate constant can be determined and the effect of residence time on the conversion
in a PFR can be observed. At the end of the experiment, the saponification process was
successfully done.

Based on Figure 2.0, the graph for the flowrate 250 ml/min shows that it is in
descending order for 15 minutes but at 20 minutes to 30 minutes the graph shows in stable
state. It shows that the conversion stable was at 40%-45%. For the flowrate 150ml/min, the
graph shows descending order at 0 min to 5 minutes but started to ascending order from 10
minutes to 30 minutes. The reason fluctuated result at 0 minute to 5 minutes was due to the
error occurred during conducted the experiment. Moreover, the graph recorded was not in
stable state as shown in flowrate 250 ml/min because the reaction time was taken only 30
minutes if the reaction time was extended stable graph would be appeared. At 30 minutes,
both flowrates had same value of conversion which is 43%. It can be observed that the initial
value of conversion was 51% for the flowrate 250ml/min while 13% of conversion for flowrate
150 ml/min both at 0 minute. It shows that the reactant consumed or converted into product
was higher for flowrate 250 ml/min compare to flowrate 150 ml/min.
From the data collected, the residence time was calculated by using formula:

𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 (𝐿),𝑉

Residence Time, 𝜏 = 𝐿
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 ( ),𝑣0
𝑚𝑖𝑛

By using formula given, the residence time for the flowrate 150 ml/min and 250
ml/min were calculated. Based on the flowrate of 150 ml/min, the average residence time
was 5.01 minutes and for the flowrate 250 ml/min the average residence time was 3.003
minutes. Based on the data collected, the explanation of how residence time can influence
the rate of reaction was observed. For the flowrate 250 ml/min, the highest conversion was
51.3% where the residence time was 3.006 minutes which was the highest. While for the
flowrate 150 ml/min, the highest conversion was 42.96% and the residence time was 5.017
minutes which was the highest. Based on the comparison it can be concluded that the longer
the residence time the highest the conversion will achieve.

Furthermore, the value of the reaction rate constant, k and the rate of reaction, -rA
were also calculated by using formula:

F0,avg æ X ö
Reaction rate constant, k = ç ÷ AND Rate of reaction, - rA = kC A
2

VPFRC A0 è 1- X ø

The value average total flowrate of solution for the 150 ml/min and 250 ml/min were 299.43
ml/min and 499.57 ml/min respectively. The value for reaction rate constant, k for flowrate
150 ml/min was 0.0265 L/mol.s while for the flowrate 250 mol/min, the value was 0.0847
L/mol.s. Moreover, the value for the rate of reaction, -rA for flowrate 150ml/min and 250
ml/min were 4.24 x 10-5 mol/L.s and 9.791 x 10-5 mol/L.s respectively. It can be concluded
that the higher the flowrate the higher the higher the reaction rate constant and the rate of
reaction. Thus, these shows that the reaction rate constant is depend to the flow rate flow in
the plug flow reactor.

During the experiment, there were some possible error that occurred which might
affect the result of the experiment. First, the pipe water that flows from the pipeline might be
corroded, so the water filled in the reactor tank might contain rusty water. Next, during the
start-up experiment, air bubble might appear along the plug flow reactor thus causing
unstable reading since the equipment contains air.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

The main objective of this experiment is to study the effect of residence time on the
reaction of Plug Flow Reactor (PFR). Based on result shown in Figure 2.0, flowrate of 250
ml/min shows descending pattern at first but slowly changed to steady state after it reached
20 minutes to 30 minutes with a stable conversion of 40% to 45%. While flowrate of 150
ml/min the result diverse with descending pattern at first and slowly increased from 10
minutes until the end if the test. The fluctuated result at the first 5 minute occurred due to
some error happened during the experiment. This error happen might be because of the
time observed only set at 30 minutes so the pattern of the result did not achieve stable yet
and maybe due to the presence of air bubble inside the PFR during the experiment.
Moreover, the result shows the reactant was converted into product shows higher result at
higher flow rate compare at the lower flow rate since the conversion for higher flow rate is
higher than at lower flow rates. Besides, with the comparison between these two flow rates,
it can be said that the longer the residence time, the higher the conversion will be achieved.
The value of average total flow rate of solution for both flow rate together with reaction rate
constant and the rate of reaction are determined. It can be concluded that the higher the flow
rate result in higher reaction rate constant and higher rate of reaction which shows that the
reaction rate constant is dependent to the flow rate flow in PFR. Thus, it can be concluded
that this experiment achieved its objectives.

While running this experiment, there might be some error happens that will affect the
result obtained. For this experiment the error might because of presence of air bubble inside
PFR that will change the result recorded. To prevent this from happened, students should
carefully check no air bubble inside PFR before begins the experiment. Besides, the corrode
water used for this experiment may lead to inaccurate result and in order to overcome this,
students need to use clear water before filling the reactor. In addition, the short time used to
run this experiment thus resulting the graph in not stable and to minimise this error, use
longer time to extend the result so it will become more stable after a while.
5.0 TUTORIAL

1. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using PFR reactors in chemical reaction.
Describe an example of industrial applications that utilized PFR reactors in its process.

There are a lot of advantages as well as the advantages for the PFR reactors. The
main advantages are that PFR reactors have high conversion rate per reactor volume
that is good for large capacities processes. The reactors have no moving parts thus this
enables the reactor to run for a long period of time without maintainable. The
disadvantages of PFR are that the temperatures are hard to control and can result in
undesirable temperature gradients. The reactors are also difficult to be controlled due to
the temperature and composition variations. Plug Flow Reactor have a wide range of
applications either liquid or gases. The most common industrial uses of PFR is in the
process of oil refining cracking of high quality gasoline in the industry oil and gas.

2. Write a one-paragraph summary of any journal article that studies chemical reaction in a
PFR. The article must have been published within the last 5 years.

A mathematical model capable to predict the dynamic behaviour of Non Isothermal

tubular (plug flow reactor) on trans-esterification of sunflower oil has been developed. The
model was simulated using the k values obtained from literature and temperatures of
25℃, 40℃ and 60℃ with varying feed ratios of 3:1, 6:1 and 9:1 respectively. The
simulated results showed the effect of temperature and feed ratio on conversion and yield
of biodiesel. The highest conversion was observed at 60℃ while that of yield was at 40℃.
A conversion of 90 % was achieved with a reactor volume of 487.7 liters. Kinetic model
for trans-esterification of vegetable oil has been developed on various reactor types, with
various catalyst system including plug flow reactors (Bambase et al., 2007; Demibas,
2002; Marjanovic et al., 2010 and Darnoko et al., 2000). However, very little has been
reported of the development of dynamic behaviour which actually predicts the
performance of plug flow reactors.

3. Explain on the PFR reactor used in the study and its significance to the study.

In this study, mathematical model to predict the dynamic effect of the trans-esterification
of vegetable oil in a non-isothermal plug flow reactor have been developed. The
developed models were simulated using Polymath software package to predict the
optimal temperature and reactor volume to achieve high conversion and yield. The
following assumptions were made for the modelling of plug flow reactor. (1) The reactor is
operated at steady state (2) The reaction is a liquid phase reaction, density is constant so
the volumetric flow rate at the inlet is equal to that of the outlet (3) The reaction is carried
out in a non-isothermal condition (4) The work term is negligible (5) The specific heat
capacity is constant (6) The summation of the energy is negligible, compared to the
enthalpy. The mathematical model and simulation carried out shows that the trans-
esterification of vegetable oil (sunflower) with methanol in a non-isothermal tubular (plug
flow reactor) is tremendously favourable by increasing the alcohol to oil ratio from 3:1 to
6:1 and 9:1. At higher ratio, the reaction mean residence time, was greatly reduced which
increased the reactor performance. The developed mathematical model is found to be
more reliable and more useful to predict the dynamic behaviour of the trans-esterification
of vegetable oil and alcohol in a non-isothermal plug flow reactor operating condition
considered especially at 40℃. The triglycerides conversion increased with temperature
and remained constant as reaction time increased while the methyl ester yield decreased
with increase in temperature with respect to time because the reaction is reversible.
6.0 REFERENCES

1. The Plug Flow Reactor (Retrieved from http://www.konferenslund.se/p/L16.pdf on the

17th April 2014)
2. Design of Ideal Plug Flow Reactors (PFRs) (Retrieved from
http://www.rshanthini.com/tmp/CP303/set4.pdf on the 17th April 2014)
3. Ramaswamy, J., & Siddareddy Vemareddy, P. (2015). Production of biogas using small-scale
plug flow reactor and sizing calculation for biodegradable solid waste. Renewables: Wind, Water,
and Solar, 2(1), 6. http://doi.org/10.1186/s40807-015-0006-0
4. Plug Flow Reactors (PFRs). (n.d.). Retrieved March 6, 2019, from
http://www.umich.edu/~elements/fogler&gurmen/html/asyLearn/bits/pfrfinal/index.htm
5. H, G. R. (2013). Simulation Model for Biodiesel Production using Plug Flow reactor: Non
Isothermal Operation. International Journal of Engineering Research (Vol. 6). Retrieved from
www.ijerd.com
6. Heinzle, E. (n.d.). Chemical Reactors Introduction to Ideal Reactors. Retrieved from
https://sistemas.eel.usp.br/docentes/arquivos/5817712/326/IntroductionReactor.pdf
7.0 APPENDICES

Appendix A: Sample calculation for flowrate of 150 mL/min:

1. Total flowrate of solutions, F0 = FNAOH + FET

Time (min) F0 Time (min) F0
0 F0 = FNAOH + FET 20 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (149+148)mL/min = (150+150) mL/min
= 297 mL/min = 300 mL/min
5 F0 = FNAOH + FET 25 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (150+150) mL/min = (148+151) mL/min
= 300 mL/min = 299 mL/min
10 F0 = FNAOH + FET 30 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (150+148) mL/min = (150+149) mL/min
= 298 mL/min = 299 mL/min
15 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (151+152) mL/min
= 303 mL/min

(297 + 300 + 298 + 303 + 300 + 299 + 299) 𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝐹0,𝑎𝑣𝑔 =
7

𝐹0,𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 299.43 𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑽𝑷𝑭𝑹
2. Residence time, 𝝉 =
𝑭𝟎

Time (min) 𝜏 Time 𝜏

(min)
0 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅 20 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏= 𝜏=
𝐹0 𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿 1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏= 𝜏=
297 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛 300 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 5.051 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜏 = 5.0 𝑚𝑖𝑛
5 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅 25 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏= 𝜏=
𝐹0 𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿 1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏= 𝜏=
300 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛 299 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 5.0 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜏 = 5.017 𝑚𝑖𝑛
10 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅 30 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏= 𝜏=
𝐹0 𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿 1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏= 𝜏=
298 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛 298 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
 𝜏 = 5.034 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜏 = 5.017 𝑚𝑖𝑛

15 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏=
𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏=
303 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 4.95 𝑚𝑖𝑛

(5.051 + 5.0 + 5.034 + 4.95 + 5.0 + 5.017 + 5.017)𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝜏𝑎𝑣𝑔 =
7
𝜏𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 5.010 𝑚𝑖𝑛

3. Inlet Concentration of NaOH, CNaOH. y = mx + c

From calibration curve, y = 140x + 4
Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀) Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀)
(min) (min)
0 y = 140x + 4 20 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
12.25 −4 12.05 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.059 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.058 𝑀
5 y = 140x + 4 25 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
12.80 −4 12.19 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.063 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.059 𝑀
10 y = 140x + 4 30 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
12.70 −4 12.80 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.062 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.063 𝑀
15 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆
12.48 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.061 𝑀
4. Outlet Concentration of NaOH, CNaOH. y = mx + c
From calibration curve, y = 140x + 4
Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀) Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀)
(min) (min)
0 y = 140x + 4 20 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
11.19 −4 10.16 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.051 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.044 𝑀
5 y = 140x + 4 25 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
12.15 −4 9.57 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.058 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.04 𝑀
10 y = 140x + 4 30 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
11.42 −4 9.02 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.053 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.036 𝑀
15 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆
10.79 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.049 𝑀

5. Conversion, X (%)
𝐼𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 − 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻
𝑋= × 100%
𝐼𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻
Time X (%) Time X(%)
(min) (min)
0 0.059 − 0.051 20 0.058 − 0.044
𝑋= × 100 𝑋= × 100
0.059 0.058
𝑋 = 12.85% 𝑋 = 23.48%
5 0.063 − 0.058 25 0.059 − 0.04
𝑋= × 100 𝑋= × 100
0.063 0.059
𝑋 = 7.39% 𝑋 = 32.0%
10 0.062 − 0.053 30 0.063 − 0.036
𝑋= × 100 𝑋= × 100
0.062 0.063
𝑋 = 14.71% 𝑋 = 42.96%
15 0.061 − 0.049
𝑋= × 100
0.061
𝑋 = 19.93%
Appendix B: Sample calculation for flowrate of 250 mL/min:

6. Total flowrate of solutions, F0 = FNAOH + FET

Time (min) F0 Time (min) F0
0 F0 = FNAOH + FET 20 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (250+249)mL/min = (253+250) mL/min
= 499 mL/min = 503 mL/min
5 F0 = FNAOH + FET 25 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (245+246) mL/min = (249+250) mL/min
= 501 mL/min = 499 mL/min
10 F0 = FNAOH + FET 30 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (248+247) mL/min = (249+252) mL/min
= 495 mL/min = 501 mL/min
15 F0 = FNAOH + FET
= (249+250) mL/min
= 499 mL/min

(499 + 501 + 495 + 499 + 503 + 499 + 501) 𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝐹0,𝑎𝑣𝑔 =
7

𝐹0,𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 499.57 𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑽𝑷𝑭𝑹
7. Residence time, 𝝉 =
𝑭𝟎

Time (min) 𝜏 Time (min) 𝜏

0 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅 20 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏= 𝜏=
𝐹0 𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿 1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏= 𝜏=
499 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛 503 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 3.006 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜏 = 2.982 𝑚𝑖𝑛

5 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅 25 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏= 𝜏=
𝐹0 𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿 1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏= 𝜏=
501 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛 499 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 2.994 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜏 = 3.006 𝑚𝑖𝑛

10 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅 30 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏= 𝜏=
𝐹0 𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿 1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏= 𝜏=
495 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛 501 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 3.030 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜏 = 2.994 𝑚𝑖𝑛
 15 𝑉𝑃𝐹𝑅
𝜏=
𝐹0
1500 𝑚𝐿
𝜏=
499 𝑚𝑙/𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜏 = 3.006 𝑚𝑖𝑛

(3.006 + 2.994 + 3.030 + 3.006 + 2.982 + 3.006 + 2.994)𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝜏𝑎𝑣𝑔 =
7
𝜏𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 3.003 𝑚𝑖𝑛

8. Inlet Concentration of NaOH, CNaOH. y = mx + c

From calibration curve, y = 140x + 4
Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀) Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀)
(min) (min)
0 y = 140x + 4 20 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
13.65 𝑐𝑚 − 4 13.39 𝑐𝑚 − 4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 =
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.069 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.067 𝑀
5 y = 140x + 4 25 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
14.67 𝑐𝑚 − 4 13.32 𝑐𝑚 − 4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 =
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.076 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.067 𝑀
10 y = 140x + 4 30 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
13.74 𝑐𝑚 − 4 13.27 𝑐𝑚 − 4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 =
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.070 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.066 𝑀
15 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆
13.06 𝑐𝑚 − 4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 =
140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.065 𝑀
9. Outlet Concentration of NaOH, CNaOH. y = mx + c
From calibration curve, y = 140x + 4
Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀) Time 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 (𝑀)
(min) (min)
0 y = 140x + 4 20 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
8.7 −4 9.48 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.034 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.039 𝑀
5 y = 140x + 4 25 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
9.45 −4 9.46 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.039 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.039 𝑀
10 y = 140x + 4 30 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆 𝑚𝑆
9.34 −4 9.30 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140 140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.038 𝑀 𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.038 𝑀
15 y = 140x + 4
𝑚𝑆
9.37 −4
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 𝑐𝑚
140
𝐶𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 = 0.038 𝑀

10. Conversion, X (%)

𝐼𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻 − 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻
𝑋= × 100%
𝐼𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑎𝑂𝐻
Time X (%) Time X(%)
(min) (min)
0 0.069 − 0.034 20 0.067 − 0.039
𝑋= × 100 𝑋= × 100
0.069 0.067
𝑋 = 51.30% 𝑋 = 41.64%
5 0.076 − 0.039 25 0.067 − 0.039
𝑋= × 100 𝑋= × 100
0.076 0.067
𝑋 = 48.44% 𝑋 = 41.42%
10 0.07 − 0.038 30 0.066 − 0.038
𝑋= × 100 𝑋= × 100
0.07 0.066
𝑋 = 45.17% 𝑋 = 42.83%
15 0.065 − 0.038
𝑋= × 100
0.065
𝑋 = 40.73%
Appendix C: Sample Calculation for Reaction Rate Constant,k and Rate of Reaction, -rA

For flow rate of 150 ml/min, residence time is 5.010 min.

F0,avg æ X ö
Reaction rate constant, k = ç ÷ AND Rate of reaction, - rA = kC A
2

VPFRC A0 è 1- X ø

𝑭𝟎,𝒂𝒗𝒈 𝑿
1. Reaction rate constant, 𝒌 = 𝑽 𝑪
(𝟏−𝑿)
𝑷𝑭𝑹 𝑨𝑶

F0,avg = 299.43 mL/min

VPFR = 1.5 L

CA0 = 0.059 mL/min

X = 0.32

299.43 𝑚𝑙 1𝐿 1 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑘= × ×
𝑚𝑖𝑛 1000 𝑚𝑙 60 𝑠

𝐿
𝑘 = 0.00499
𝑠

0.00499 𝐿/𝑠 0.32

𝑘= ( )
1.5 𝐿 × 0.059 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝐿 1 − 0.32

𝐿
0.00499
𝑘= 𝑠 (0.4706)
0.0885 𝑚𝑜𝑙

𝐿
𝑘 = 0.0265
𝑚𝑜𝑙. 𝑠

2. Rate of reaction, −𝒓𝑨 = 𝒌𝑪𝟐A

𝐿 𝑚𝑜𝑙 2
−𝑟𝐴 = 0.0265 × (0.04 )
𝑚𝑜𝑙. 𝑠 𝐿

𝑚𝑜𝑙
−𝑟𝐴 = 4.24 × 10−5
𝐿. 𝑠
For flow rate of 250 ml/min, residence time is 3.003 min.

F0,avg æ X ö
Reaction rate constant, k = ç ÷ AND Rate of reaction, - rA = kC A
2

VPFRC A0 è 1- X ø

𝑭𝟎,𝒂𝒗𝒈 𝑿
1. Reaction rate constant, 𝒌 = 𝑽 𝑪
(𝟏−𝑿)
𝑷𝑭𝑹 𝑨𝑶

F0,avg = 499.57 mL/min

VPFR = 1.5 L

CA0 = 0.069 mL/min

X = 0.513

499.57 𝑚𝑙 1𝐿 1 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑘= × ×
𝑚𝑖𝑛 1000 𝑚𝑙 60 𝑠

𝐿
𝑘 = 0.008326
𝑠

0.008326 𝐿/𝑠 0.513

𝑘= ( )
1.5 𝐿 × 0.069 𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝐿 1 − 0.513

𝐿
0.008326 𝑠
𝑘= (1.0534)
0.1035 𝑚𝑜𝑙

𝐿
𝑘 = 0.0847
𝑚𝑜𝑙. 𝑠

2. Rate of reaction, −𝒓𝑨 = 𝒌𝑪𝟐A

𝐿 𝑚𝑜𝑙 2
−𝑟𝐴 = 0.0847 × (0.034 )
𝑚𝑜𝑙. 𝑠 𝐿

𝑚𝑜𝑙
−𝑟𝐴 = 9.791 × 10−5
𝐿. 𝑠