Supplementary vapor pressure data of the glycol ethers, 1-methoxy-2-propanol, and 2-methoxyethanol at a pressure range of (15 to 177) kPa

doi:10.1016/j.jct.2012.04.029

The Journal of Chemical Thermodynamics

Volume 53, October 2012, Pages 114-118

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jct.2012.04.029 Get rights and content

Abstract

The vapor pressure of pure 1-methoxy-2-propanol and 2-methoxyethanol, commonly used as co-solvents in inks, paints, coatings, organic/water solutions among many other applications, were measured with a dynamic recirculation apparatus at a pressure range of (15 to 177) kPa. The measurements were performed at temperature ranges of (342 to 412) K for 1-methoxy-2-propanol and (346 to 417) K for 2-methoxyethanol. The maximum likelihood method was used to estimate the parameters of the Antoine equation, the parameters of an extended Antoine equation and the Wagner equation were determined by non linear least squares method. The three models showed root mean square deviations (rmsd) of 0.39%, 0.38%, and 0.29%, and 0.37%, 0.33%, and 0.32%, for 1-methoxy-2-propanol and 2-methoxyethanol, respectively. Additionally, the experimental data and correlation were compared with those available in the literature.

Highlights

► Vapor pressure of 2-methoxyethanol and 1-methoxy-2-propanol were measured. ► Complementary data are reported at ranges of (342 to 417) K and (15 to 177) kPa. ► Three commonly used vapor pressure equations were fitted to experimental data. ► The parameters of Antoine and Wagner type equations were estimated. ► The relative deviations (rmsd) from the three vapor pressure equations were <0.4%.

Introduction

Common glycol ethers are oxygenated hydrocarbons of major industrial and economic importance. Since they have both functional hydrophobic and hydrophilic groups they are suitable for a large number of industrial and commercial applications including household products, paints, inks, coatings, cleaning solutions and biochemical applications [1]. Nonetheless, several studies related to toxicity suggest that exposure to glycol ethers (1-methoxy-2-propanol and 2-methoxyethanol, among others) can cause adverse effects on human health [2], [3], [4], [5]. Vapor pressure of pure glycol ethers is a relevant property on which the vapor-liquid calculations have a strong dependence and therefore it is of great importance in the design of separation processes. Moreover, several derived physical-chemical properties can be estimated from the vapor pressure data. Besides, limited information regarding vapor pressure data were reported in the literature for the glycol ethers 1-methoxy-2-propanol and 2-methoxyethanol.

The main objective of this work was to contribute with new experimental information of the vapor pressures for the glycol ethers, 1-methoxy-2-propanol and 2-methoxyethanol, in the range of (15 to 177) kPa by measuring the isobaric (vapor + liquid) equilibrium. Additionally, the parameters of three commonly used vapor pressure equations were estimated: the Antoine model, the Wagner model [6], and an extended Antoine model [7].

Section snippets

Materials

Pure nitrogen (N₂) was supplied by AGA Chile with no less than 99.999% of N₂. HPLC-grade 2-methoxyethanol and pro-analysis 1-methoxy-2-propanol were obtained from Aldrich (St. Louis, MO) with purity greater than 99.5%. These materials were used without further purification.

Apparatus and procedures

The vapor pressure was measured using a commercial all-glass dynamic recirculation isobaric (vapor + liquid) equilibrium (VLE) apparatus (Labodest model 602D, i-Fischer Engineering GmbH, Waldbüttelbrunn, Germany) [8]. Its

Results and discussion

Experimental values of temperature and pressures measured for 1-methoxy-2-propanol at pressure range of (15 to 177) kPa and temperature range of (342 to 412) K and, for 2-methoxyethanol at the same pressure range and temperature range of (346 to 417) K are listed in table 1. The regressed parameters of three vapor pressure equations, described below, along with their root mean square deviation (rmsd) are reported in table 2.

The maximum likelihood method was used to estimate the parameters of the

Conclusions

New and complementary information for the vapor pressure of pure 1-methoxy-2-propanol, and 2-methoxyethanol was presented in this work for the temperature ranges of (342 to 412) K and (346 to 417) K, respectively. The measurements were carried out using a VLE apparatus with an uncertainty <0.2%. The parameters of three common vapor pressure equations were estimated. The Antoine, Wagner and extended Antoine equations represented the experimental data of this work with rmsd < 0.4%. A Wagner-type

Acknowledgements

The present work was funded by the Chilean agency Fondecyt (Regular project 111-1008). Ana I. González helped setting up the experimental apparatus, her help is greatly appreciated.

References (22)

B. Ramsauer et al.
Fluid Phase Equilibr.
(2008)
F. Welsch
Toxicol. Lett.
(2005)
P. Ruiz et al.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
(2011)
A. Bejarano et al.
J. Chem. Thermodyn.
(2009)
M. Čenský et al.
Fluid Phase Equilibr.
(2010)
Š. Psutka et al.
Fluid Phase Equilibr.
(2004)
E. Lladosa et al.
Fluid Phase Equilibr.
(2007)
A. Starek et al.
Toxicol. Lett.
(2007)
G. Johanson
Crit. Rev. Toxicol.
(2000)
W. Wagner et al.
J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data
(1993)

Aspen Thechnology Inc., Aspen Plus® Version 10.2: User Guide, Cambridge, MA,...

Cited by (11)

Ebulliometric determination of isobaric vapor - liquid equilibria of toluene with 1-methoxy-2-propanol and 1-methoxy-2-propyl acetate
2023, Chemical Data Collections
Vapor-liquid equilibrium data for pure species 1‑methoxy-2-propanol, 1‑methoxy-2-propyl acetate, toluene and binary mixtures with toluene was generated using a modified ebulliometer at six different pressures in the range of (100.82 to 60.08) kPa. The parameters of Antoine equation were obtained by regression based on the experimentally determined boiling points of pure species at different pressures. The binary VLE data for the two binary pairs was modeled using Margules 3-suffix, Wilson, NRTL, UNIQUAC and UNIFAC models. NRTL model gave better fit with the experimental data as compared to other models. Toluene – 1‑methoxy-2-propanol system exhibits an azeotrope.
Isobaric (vapor + liquid) equilibria for the binary systems (1-methoxy-2-propanol + 2-methoxyethanol), (2-butanone + 2-methoxyethanol) and (water + 2-methoxyethanol) at pressures of (74.5, 101.3, and 134.0) kPa
2015, Journal of Chemical Thermodynamics
Citation Excerpt :
In all these references was verified a non-ideal behavior (positive deviations) and the presence of an azeotrope in the water-rich region. Information for the vapor pressures for the two glycol ethers, 2-butanone and water, at the temperature ranges considered in this work, was obtained from the literature [10,11]. The main objective of this work was to contribute with new and complementary experimental information and thermodynamic modeling for VLE for three binary systems; (1-methoxy-2-propanol + 2-methoxyethanol), (2-butanone + 2-methoxyethanol) and (water + 2-methoxyethanol).
Isobaric (vapor + liquid) equilibria of three binary systems (1-methoxy-2-propanol + 2-methoxyethanol), (2-butanone + 2-methoxyethanol) and (water + 2-methoxyethanol), was measured using an apparatus with dynamic recirculation and gas chromatography analysis for both phases. The measurements were carried out at pressures of (74.5, 101.3, and 134.0) kPa and temperature ranged from (343 to 407) K. No partial liquid miscibility was observed for any of the systems studied. Azeotropic behavior was verified for the system (water + 2-methoxyethanol) at the water-rich region. Thermodynamic modeling of the data measured was successfully accomplished for (2-butanone + 2-methoxyethanol) and (water + 2-methoxyethanol). In order to represent the no-ideality of the liquid phase, three alternatives for the activity coefficient model were used, Non Random Two Liquid, van Laar and Wilson. Results showed that the relative root mean square deviations from the experimental molar fractions were, <12% for the vapor phase, and <1% for the liquid phase.
Modeling vapor pressures of solvent systems with and without a salt effect: An extension of the LSER approach
2015, Journal of Chemical Thermodynamics
Citation Excerpt :
Traditionally, four vapor pressure equations of practical interest are comprehensively used in engineering practice to correlate vapor pressure of a pure solvent, i.e. the three-parameters Antoine and Cox equations, four-parameters Wagner equation and the SVRC model with two fluid-specific regressed parameters [39–44]. Several relations derived from the corresponding states or kinetic theory have found the use to varying degrees [39–45]. However, most compilations of vapor pressure present parameters of the Antoine equation being routinely used in design practice for correlating vapor pressure beyond a limited temperature range of experimental data, especially, far away from the critical point.
A new polynomial vapor pressure approach for pure solvents is presented. The model is incorporated into the LSER (linear solvation energy relation) based solvation model framework and checked for consistency in reproducing experimental vapor pressures of salt-containing solvent systems. The developed two structural forms of the generalized solvation model (Senol, 2013) provide a relatively accurate description of the salting effect on vapor pressure of (solvent + salt) systems. The equilibrium data spanning vapor pressures of eighteen (solvent + salt) and three (solvent (1) + solvent (2) + salt) systems have been subjected to establish the basis for the model reliability analysis using a log-ratio objective function.
The examined vapor pressure relations reproduce the observed performance relatively accurately, yielding the overall design factors of 1.084, 1.091 and 1.052 for the integrated property-basis solvation model (USMIP), reduced property-basis solvation model and concentration-dependent model, respectively. Both the integrated property-basis and reduced property-basis solvation models were able to simulate satisfactorily the vapor pressure data of a binary solvent mixture involving a salt, yielding an overall mean error of 5.2%.
Solvation-based vapour pressure model for (solvent + salt) systems in conjunction with the Antoine equation
2013, Journal of Chemical Thermodynamics
This study deals with modelling the vapour pressure of a (solvent + salt) system on the basis of the principles of LSER. The solvation model framework clarifies the simultaneous impact of several physical variables such as the vapour pressure of a pure solvent estimated by the Antoine equation, the solubility and solvatochromic parameters of the solvent and the physical properties of the ionic salt. It has been analyzed independently the performance of two structural forms of the generalized model, i.e., a relation depending on an integration of the properties of the solvent and the ionic salt and a relation on a reduced property-basis. A simplified concentration-dependent vapour pressure model has been also explored and implemented on the relevant systems. The vapour pressure data of sixteen (solvent + salt) systems have been processed to analyze statistically the reliability of existing models in terms of a log–ratio objective function. The proposed vapour pressure models match relatively well the observed performance, yielding the overall design factors of 1.066 and 1.073 for the solvation-based models with the integrated and reduced properties, and 1.008 for the concentration-based model, respectively.
Strategies for Large-Scale Fabrication of Perovskite Films for Solar Cells
2022, Solar RRL
Vapor Pressures and Thermophysical Properties of Dimethoxymethane, 1,2-Dimethoxyethane, 2-Methoxyethanol, and 2-Ethoxyethanol: Data Reconciliation and Perturbed-Chain Statistical Associating Fluid Theory Modeling
2021, Journal of Chemical and Engineering Data

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Supplementary vapor pressure data of the glycol ethers, 1-methoxy-2-propanol, and 2-methoxyethanol at a pressure range of (15 to 177) kPa

Abstract

Highlights

Introduction

Section snippets

Materials

Apparatus and procedures

Results and discussion

Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Fluid Phase Equilibr.

Toxicol. Lett.

Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.

J. Chem. Thermodyn.

Fluid Phase Equilibr.

Fluid Phase Equilibr.

Fluid Phase Equilibr.

Toxicol. Lett.

Crit. Rev. Toxicol.

J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data