1.

0 ABSTRACT
2.0 METHODOLOGY

Preparation of Calibration Curve for Conversion vs. Conductivity

0.15-L of 0.40 M ethyl acetate solution and 0.15-L of 0.40 M acetic acid solution are
prepared.

The conductivity for each conversion values are determined by mixing the two solutions
with different volume that indicate conversion of 0%,25%,50%,75% and 100%.

General Experiment Procedures for PBR Operation

1. 3 liter of ethyl acetate solution (0.4 M solution) is prepared and filled into the tank.

2. The power for the control panel is turned on. Valves V1 and V4 are opened to allow EtAc
solution to enter the packed bed reactor.

3. The flow rate controller is adjusted to a constant flow rate of 20 ml/min.

4. Once the reactant solution passes through the reactor, the reactor inlet and outlet must be
connected to the manometer (by tightening the nut on top of the manometer) to measure
the pressure drop.

5. The conductivity of the effluent at outlet is measured at time intervals of 2 minutes.

6. Both inlet and outlet steady state conductivity values are recorded. The concentration of
acetic acid (HAc) exiting the reactor and extent of conversion are obtained from the
calibration curve.

7. Steps 3 to 6 are repeated for different residence times by changing the feed flow rates of
EtAC to 30 and 40 mL/min.
General Experiment Procedure for the Determination of Rate Constant in Batch Mode

1. 250 mL ethyl acetate solution (0.4 M) is prepared in a beaker.

2. 1 g of the pre-swelled catalyst (dry weight) is added into the beaker under vigorous stirring
using the magnetic stirrer.

3. The conductivity of the initial and at different time interval samples is recorded.

4. The specific rate constant using differential or integral method is determined.

5.
3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1 Results
Part A: Preparation of Standard Calibration Curve of Sodium Hydroxide and Sodium Acetate
Preparation of Solution for Calibration Curve

 For 0.15L of 0.4M Ethyl Acetate ( EtOAc)solution:

Molar mass of Ethyl Acetate = 88.11 g/mol
SG =0.895 Purity = 99.5%
𝑆𝐺 𝑥 𝑃𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑥 1000𝑔/𝐿
Molarity of Ethyl-Acetate =
𝑀𝑊
0.895 𝑥 0.995 𝑥 1000
=
88.11

= 10.107 M
M1V1 = M2V2
10.107(V1) = 0.4 (0.15)
V1 = 0.00594= 5.94 mL of EtOAc

 For 0.15L of 0.1M Acetic Acid (HAc) solution:

Molar mass of Acetic Acid = 60.05 g/mol

Purity= 100% SG=1.05

𝑆𝐺 𝑥 𝑃𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑥 1000𝑔/𝐿
Molarity of Acetic acid =
𝑀𝑊
1.05 x 1.0 x 1000
=
60.05
= 17.485 M

M1V1 = M2V2
(0.4𝑀)(0.15𝐿) = (17.485)(𝑉2 )

V2 = 0.00343L = 3.43 mL
Part B: Preparation of solution for experiment about 3L of 0.4M of Ethyl Acetate

3L of 0.4 M of Ethyl Acetate was prepared and experiment was conducted in packed bed
reactor.

Preparation of 3L of 0.4M Ethyl Acetate solution :-

Molar mass of Ethyl Acetate = 88.11 g/mol
SG =0.895 Purity = 99.5%
𝑆𝐺 𝑥 𝑃𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑥 1000𝑔/𝐿
Molarity of Ethyl-Acetate =
𝑀𝑊
0.895 𝑥 0.995 𝑥 1000
=
88.11

= 10.107 M
M1V1 = M2V2
10.107(V1) = 0.4 (3)
V1 = 0.1187= 118.7mL of EtOAc

Part C: Experimental Results

Table 3.1: Table of Conductivity against Composition of EtOAc-HAc Mixture

Volume of solution, mL Conversion, X (%) Conductivity
Ethyl Acetate Acetic Acid (mS/cm)
100 0 0 0.3
75 25 25 0.5
50 50 50 0.7
25 75 75 0.8
0 100 100 0.9
 Table 3.2: PBR Operation Data
Flow rate 20 30 40
(mL/min)
Time,t (min) Conductivity of the effluent at outlet (mS/cm)
0 0.06 0.06 0.06
2 0.78 0.58 0.64
4 0.73 0.56 0.63
6 0.69 0.56 0.61
8 0.67 0.62 0.60
10 0.64 0.60 0.59
12 0.64 0.60 0.59
14 0.64 0.60 0.59
Pressure Drop, ∆P 110 55 26
(mm Hg)

Table 3.3: Data for Determination of Rate Constant in Batch Mode

Time,t (min) Conductivity (mS/cm)

0 0.38
2 0.44
4 0.47
6 0.49

8 0.51
10 0.53
12 0.55
14 0.55
16 0.55
3.2 Discussion
1. Plot the calibration curve of conversion vs. conductivity and discuss relationship
between these parameters.

Graph of Conversion (X) vs Conductivity reading (mS/cm)

1

0.8

0.6
Conversion (X)

0.4
y = 1.6164x - 0.5345
R² = 0.9698
0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

-0.2
Conductivity reading (mS/cm)

Figure 3.1: Calibration Curve of Conversion against Conductivity

Figure 3.1 shows the relationship between conversion and conductivity represent by a linear
equation, y = 1.6164x -0.5345 where the slope = 1.6164 and y-axis intercept = -0.5345. Based
on the figure above, the conductivity is directly proportional to the conversion. The calibration
curve shows that when conductivity increases, the value of the conversion increases. Acetic
acid is formed over time, the higher the conversion will be obtained. This can be explained by
the concept that the higher the conversion, the more acetic acid will be formed, the more the
amount of H+ ions in the solution. If the acetyl acetate will hydrolysed to acetic acid and
ethanol. This reaction is a reversible reaction, therefore the forward reaction will higher than
the backward reaction. In other words, the acetic acid still domain the reaction over the time.
Conductivity meter are able to detect both H+ and CH3COOH ions in the solution. Yet, the
major contributor for the conductivity is the H+ ions as compared to the CH3COOH- ions which
present in the acetyl acetate solution. As a comparison, the H+ ions have higher conductivity
ability as compared to CH3COOH- ions.
2) Detailed derivation of equations required to determine the rate constant in batch and
PBR.

Step 1: Determine the reaction order

Integral method is used to determine the reaction order of the reaction. We guess the reaction
order and integrate the differential equation used to model the batch system. If the order we
assume is correct, the appropriate plot of the concentration-time data should be linear. While
for differential method by combining the mole balance and the rate law given to obtain the
reaction order after taking the natural logarithm of both sides. (Fogler, 2014)
CH3COOC2H5 (A) + H2O (B) ↔ CH3COOH (C) + C2H5OH (D)
Assume that the reverse reaction occur in small extent at the operating temperature and
pressure, and thus it can be neglected. For our experiment, we will use integral method to prove
the reaction order.

Batch
𝑑𝑁𝐴
Mole balance: = 𝑟𝐴 𝑉
𝑑𝑡
𝜷
Rate law: −𝒓𝑨 = 𝒌𝑨 𝑪𝜶𝑨 𝑪𝑩
𝜷
−𝒓𝑨 = 𝒌𝑪𝜶𝑨 ; Where k = kA𝑪𝑩
Stoichiometry: V=V0 (liquid phase, V of batch is constant)
𝑁𝐴
CA = 𝑉0
𝒅𝑪𝑨
Combining: − = 𝒌𝑪𝜶𝑨
𝒅𝒕

Assuming this is a second order reaction (α = 2):

𝒅𝑪𝑨
− = 𝒌𝑪𝟐𝑨
𝒅𝒕
𝐶𝐴 𝑡
1
−∫ 2 𝑑𝐶𝐴 = 𝑘 ∫ 𝑑𝑡
𝐶𝐴0 𝐶𝐴 0

1 1
− = 𝑘𝑡
𝐶𝐴 𝐶𝐴0
𝟏 𝟏
∴ = 𝐤𝐭 +
𝐂𝐀 𝐂𝐀𝟎
 Table 3.4: Concentration versus Time Data

Time, t Conductivity CA0 CA(M) 1/CA(M-1)

(min) (mS/cm) Conversion, X (M) =CA0(1-X)
0 0.38 0.079732 0.4 0.3681072 2.7166
2 0.44 0.176716 0.4 0.3293136 3.0366
4 0.47 0.225208 0.4 0.3099168 3.2267
6 0.49 0.257536 0.4 0.2969856 3.3672
8 0.51 0.289864 0.4 0.2840544 3.5205
10 0.53 0.322192 0.4 0.2711232 3.6884
12 0.55 0.354520 0.4 0.258192 3.8731
14 0.55 0.354520 0.4 0.258192 3.8731
16 0.55 0.354520 0.4 0.258192 3.8731

Graph of 1/Ca vs t
4.5
4
3.5
3 y = 0.0729x + 2.8806
R² = 0.9364
2.5
1/Ca

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
t (min)

Figure 3.2: Graph of 1/CA versus Time

Since the plot of 1/CA versus time is a linear graph, hence the reaction is second order.
𝟏 𝟏
Based on the equation = 𝐤𝐭 + ,
𝐂𝐀 𝐂𝐀𝟎

From Figure 3.2, k = slope of the graph of 1/CA vs time (t) = 0.0729 dm3/mol.min
Step 2: Derivation of equations required to determine the rate constant in batch and PBR

Batch Reactor:
𝑑𝑋
Mole balance : 𝑁𝐴0 𝑑𝑡 = −𝑟𝐴 𝑉

Rate law : −𝑟𝐴 = 𝑘𝐶𝐴2

Stoichiometry : Liquid phase (V constant, no pressure drop), assume isothermal
𝐶𝐴0 (1−𝑋) 𝑃 𝑇0
𝐶𝐴 = 1+𝜀𝑋 𝑃0 𝑇
𝑃 𝑇0
=0, = 0, ε = 0
𝑃0 𝑇

𝐶𝐴 = 𝐶𝐴0 (1 − 𝑋)

𝑑𝑋
Combine : 𝑁𝐴0 𝑑𝑡 = 𝑘𝐶2𝐴0 (1 − 𝑋)2 𝑉
2
1 𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑉
∫ (1−𝑋)2 𝑑𝑋 = 𝑁𝐴0
∫ 𝑑𝑡

2
1 𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑉
∫ (1−𝑋)2 𝑑𝑋 = 𝐶𝐴0 𝑉0
∫ 𝑑𝑡 ; NA0 = CA0V0

1
∫ (1−𝑋)2 𝑑𝑋 = k𝐶𝐴0 ∫ 𝑑𝑡 ; V = V0

𝑋
[(1−𝑋)]
k= 𝐶𝐴0 𝑡

𝑿 𝟏
k = (𝟏−𝑿) (𝑪 )
𝑨𝟎 𝒕

PBR
𝑑𝑋
Design equation : 𝐹𝐴0 𝑑𝑊 = −𝑟′𝐴

Rate law : −𝑟′𝐴 = 𝑘′𝐶𝐴2

Stoichiometry : Liquid phase (V constant, no pressure drop), assume isothermal
𝐶𝐴0 (1−𝑋) 𝑃 𝑇0
𝐶𝐴 =
1+𝜀𝑋 𝑃0 𝑇
𝑃 𝑇0
=0, = 0, ε = 0
𝑃0 𝑇

𝐶𝐴 = 𝐶𝐴0 (1 − 𝑋)
𝑑𝑋
Combine : 𝐹𝐴0 𝑑𝑊 = 𝑘′𝐶2𝐴0 (1 − 𝑋)2

2
1 𝑘′𝐶𝐴0
∫ (1−𝑋)2 𝑑𝑋 = 𝐹𝐴0
∫ 𝑑𝑊

2
1 𝑘′𝐶𝐴0
∫ (1−𝑋)2 𝑑𝑋 = 𝐶 ∫ 𝑑𝑊 ; FA0 = CA0V0
𝐴0 𝑉0
 𝑿
[(𝟏−𝑿)]× 𝑽𝟎 𝑿 𝒗𝟎
k' = = (𝟏−𝑿) (𝑪 )
𝑪𝑨𝟎 ×𝑾 𝑨𝟎 𝑾

3) Using the Ergun equation to determine the bed properties. Explain why pressure
drop should not affect for liquid phase reaction.

dP G  1    1501    
  3    1.75G 
dz g c D p     Dp 

𝑑𝑃 𝐺(1 − ∅) 150(1 − ∅)𝜇 𝑃0 𝑇 𝐹𝑇

=− [ + 1.75𝐺] ( )
𝑑𝑧 𝜌0 𝑔𝑐 𝐷𝑝 ∅3 𝐷𝑝 𝑃 𝑇0 𝐹𝑇0

Simplifying yields
𝑑𝑃 𝑃0 𝑇 𝐹𝑇
= −𝛽0 ( )
𝑑𝑧 𝑃 𝑇0 𝐹𝑇0
𝛽0 is a constant that depends only on the properties of the packed bed and the entrance
conditions.
𝐺(1 − ∅) 150(1 − ∅)𝜇
𝛽0 = [ + 1.75𝐺]
𝜌0 𝑔𝑐 𝐷𝑝 ∅3 𝐷𝑝

𝑃 = 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒
∅ = 𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦
𝐷𝑝 = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑑

𝜇 = 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦
𝑧 = 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒
𝜌 = 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦
𝐺 = 𝜌𝜇 = 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

In liquid phase reactions, the concentration of reactants is insignificantly affected by even

relatively large changes in the total pressure as liquids are incompressible. Consequently, the
effect of the pressure drop on the rate of reaction can be totally ignored when sizing liquid
phase chemical reactors. Hence, the conversion for liquid phase reaction will completely not
be affected. (Fogler, 2006).
4) Derive the equation to predict the conversion in the PBR. (Use the specific rate constant
determined in batch mode.)

Derivation of rate constant in PBR:

𝑑𝑋
Design Equation: 𝐹𝐴0 𝑑𝑊 = −𝑟𝐴ʼ

Rate Law:
From the result of batch mode experiment, the reaction is in second order reaction.

−𝑟′𝐴 = 𝑘𝐶𝐴2

Stoichiometry:
Liquid phase, isothermal, pressure drop is not obvious (neglegilble), ε=0

𝐶𝐴0 (1 − 𝑋) 𝑃 𝑇0
𝐶𝐴 =
1 + 𝜀𝑋 𝑃0 𝑇
𝐶𝐻𝐴𝑐 = 𝐶𝐸𝑡𝐴𝑐0 (𝑋), 𝐶𝐸𝑡𝐴𝑐 = 𝐶𝐸𝑡𝐴𝑐0 (1 − 𝑋)
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐴 = 𝐸𝑡𝐴𝑐

Combine:
𝑑𝑋
𝐹𝐴0 = 𝑘𝐶𝐴2
𝑑𝑊
2
𝑑𝑋 𝑘𝐶𝐴0
= (1 − 𝑋)2
𝑑𝑊 𝐹𝐴0
𝑋 2 𝑊
1 𝑘𝐶𝐴0
∫ 𝑑𝑋 = ∫ 𝑑𝑊
0 (1 − 𝑋)2 𝐹𝐴0 0
2
𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑋
( )𝑊 =
𝐹𝐴0 1−𝑋
𝑣0 𝑋
∴𝑘=( )( )
𝑊𝐶𝐴0 1 − 𝑋

Derive equation to predict the conversion of PBR

𝐹𝐴0 𝑋
𝑘=( )( )
𝑊𝐶𝐴0 1 − 𝑋

As the relationship of k’W = kV

𝑘𝐶 𝑊 𝑘𝐶 𝑉
( 𝑣𝐴0 ) ( 𝑣𝐴0 )
0 0
𝑋= =
𝑘𝐶 𝑊 𝑘𝐶 V
1 + ( 𝑣𝐴0 ) 1 + ( 𝑣𝐴0 )
0 0
From the experimental data CA0 = 0.4 M = 0.4 mol/dm3
Rate constant of batch mode, k = 0.0729 dm3/mol.min

Reactor specifications: PBR

 Tubular Diameter = 8.5 cm = 0.085 m

Radius = 0.085 m÷2 = 0.0425 m
 Tubular Length= 42 cm = 0.42 m

Volume of reactor, V = 𝜋 r2 L = 𝜋 (0.0425m)2 (0.42m) = 2.383 x 10-3 m3 = 2.383 dm3

Conversion in PBR for different feed flow rate

𝑑𝑚3 𝑚𝑜𝑙
0.0729 𝑥 0.4 𝑥 2.383 𝑑𝑚3
(
𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑚3 )
𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑉 3
0.02 𝑑𝑚 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑚𝐿 𝑑𝑚3 ( )
𝑣0
When 𝑣0 = 20 𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.02 𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑋= 𝑘𝐶 𝑉 = 𝑑𝑚3 𝑚𝑜𝑙
1+( 𝐴0 ) 0.0729 𝑥 0.4 𝑥 2.383 𝑑𝑚3
𝑣0
1+ (
𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑚3 )
0.02 𝑑𝑚3 /𝑚𝑖𝑛

X = 0.7765
𝑑𝑚3 𝑚𝑜𝑙
0.0729 𝑥 0.4 𝑥 2.383 𝑑𝑚3
(
𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑚3 )
𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑉 3
0.03 𝑑𝑚 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑚𝐿 𝑑𝑚3 ( )
𝑣0
When 𝑣0 = 30 𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.03 𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑋= 𝑘𝐶 𝑉 = 𝑑𝑚3 𝑚𝑜𝑙
1+( 𝐴0 ) 0.0729 𝑥 0.4 𝑥 2.383 𝑑𝑚3
𝑣0
1+ (
𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑚3 )
0.03 𝑑𝑚3 /𝑚𝑖𝑛

X = 0.6985
𝑑𝑚3 𝑚𝑜𝑙
0.00006 𝑥 0.4 𝑥 2.383 𝑑𝑚3
(
𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑚3 )
𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑉 3
0.04 𝑑𝑚 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑚𝐿 𝑑𝑚3 ( )
𝑣0
When 𝑣0 = 40 𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.04 𝑚𝑖𝑛 , 𝑋= 𝑘𝐶𝐴0 𝑉 = 𝑑𝑚3 𝑚𝑜𝑙
1+( ) 0.00006 𝑥 0.4 𝑥 2.383 𝑑𝑚3
𝑣0
1+ (
𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑚3 )
3
0.04 𝑑𝑚 /𝑚𝑖𝑛

X = 0.6347
5) Using the equation derived in step 4 and using the experimental conversion data,
determine the rate constant at different flow rates. Compare the specific rate constants
and analyse the deviations.

Flow rate = 20mL/min

Conversion X(%) = 1.6164 Conductivity (mS/cm) - 0.5345

Time (min) Outlet Conductivity(mS/cm) Conversion (%)

0 0.06
-43.7516
2 0.78
72.6292
4 0.73
64.5472
6 0.69
58.0816
8 0.67
54.8488
10 0.64
49.9996
12 0.64
49.9996
14 0.64
49.9996

Flow rate = 30mL/min

Conversion X(%) = 1.6164 Conductivity (mS/cm) - 0.5345

Time (min) Outlet Conductivity(mS/cm) Conversion (%)

0 0.06
-43.7516
2 0.58
40.3012
4 0.56
37.0684
6 0.56
37.0684
8 0.62
46.7668
10 0.60
43.5340
12 0.60
43.5340
14 0.60
43.5340
Flow rate = 40mL/min
Conversion X(%) = 1.6164 Conductivity (mS/cm) - 0.5345

Time (min) Outlet Conductivity(mS/cm) Conversion (%)

0 0.06
-43.7516
2 0.64
49.9996
4 0.63
48.3832
6 0.61
45.1504
8 0.60
43.5340
10 0.59
41.9176
12 0.59
41.9176
14 0.59
41.9176

From the result of PBR above,

For 𝒗𝟎 = 0.02 dm3/min and X = 0.4999,
𝑋 𝑣0 0.4999 0.02𝑑𝑚3 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
k = (1−𝑋) (𝐶 ) = (1−0.4999) ( 𝑚𝑜𝑙 ) = 0.0209 dm3/mol.min
𝐴0 𝑉 0.4 𝑥2.383 𝑑𝑚3
𝑑𝑚3

For 𝒗𝟎 = 0.03 dm3/min and X = 0.4353,

𝑋 𝑣0 0.4353 0.03𝑑𝑚3 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
k = (1−𝑋) (𝐶 ) = (1−0.4353) ( 𝑚𝑜𝑙 ) =0.0243 dm3/mol.min
𝐴0 𝑉 0.4 𝑥2.383 𝑑𝑚3
𝑑𝑚3

For 𝒗𝟎 = 0.04 dm3/min and X = 0.4192,

𝑋 𝑣0 0.4192 0.04𝑑𝑚3 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
k = (1−𝑋) (𝐶 ) = (1−0.4192) ( 𝑚𝑜𝑙 ) =0.0303 dm3/mol.min
𝐴0 𝑉 0.4 𝑥2.383 𝑑𝑚3
𝑑𝑚3

Residence time, τ =VPBR/V0

2383𝑚𝐿
Τ20mL/min=20𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛 =119.15min

2383𝑚𝐿
Τ30mL/min=30𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛 =79.43min

2383𝑚𝐿
Τ40mL/min=40𝑚𝐿/𝑚𝑖𝑛 =59.58min

In batch reactor, the specific rate constant is 0.0729 min-1 which was obtained from the
equation of the graph. From the unit of rate constant, it can be determined that it is a first order
reaction. For PBR operation, the unit rate constant for 20mL, 30mL and 40 mL/min are
mL/min. gcat which is also of a first order reaction. As we can observe from experimental data,
the value for rate constant is higher compared to rate constant in different flowrate. The rate
constant is affected only by the temperature of reaction. Reaction rate constant also depends
on whether or not a catalyst is present, and in gas-phase reactions, it may be a function of total
pressure (Fogler, 2006). However, the increasing feed flow rate in PBR will increase the rate
constant, which corresponds to our data.

The other objective of this experiment is to study the effect of residence time on the
conversion. The experiment that we have conducted follows the theory. As the feed flow rate
increase, residence time will be decrease thus causing the decrease in the conversion. For
flowrate of 20 mL/min, the residence time is 119.15 min and the conversion is 49.99%. For
flowrate of 30 mL/min, the residence time is 79.43 min followed by 43.53% conversion while
for the 40 mL/min, the residence time is 59.58 min and the conversion calculated is 41.92%.
This prove that the residence time is affected by feed flowrate.

6) Comparison of results obtained with the experimental data reported in the literature
of similar conditions.

After the experiment is carried out, the result that we obtained shows no deviation from
the experimental data. From our experimental study, the values of the reaction rate constant (k)
that are calculated from the design equation does not deviate from experimental data as the
values of k increases with increasing flow rate. Besides, the other value suggested also follows
the experimental data. This is shown when the values of residence time decrease, the values of
the conversion also decrease.

7) Comments on the differences in the results obtained and discussion of the results and
the quality of the data and experimental procedures (difficulties and uncertainties).

1) Flow rate of EtAC at 20 mL/min, reaction rate constant, k is 0.0209 dm3/mol.min

2) Flow rate of EtAC at 30 mL/min, reaction rate constant, k is 0.0243 dm3/mol.min
3) Flow rate of EtAC at 40 mL/min, reaction rate constant, k is 0.0303 dm3/mol.min
The flow rate of the reactants affects the reaction rate constant. However, reaction rate constant
should be constant under the same temperature. The changes in reaction rate constant values
are due to the endothermic reaction of hydrolysis. The value of reaction rate constant is strongly
dependable on the temperature, according to Arrhenius equation. These other variables
normally exhibit much less effect on rate constant than temperature does with exception of
supercritical solvents; hence the value of the reaction rate constant varies.

As the feed flow rate increases, residence time will be shorter and conversion will decrease.
For flowrate of 20 mL/min, the residence time is 119.15 min and the conversion is 49.99%.
For flowrate of 30 mL/min, the residence time is 79.43 min followed by 43.53% conversion
while for the 40 mL/min, the residence time is 59.58 min and the conversion calculated is
41.92%. This indicates that the residence time is affected by feed flow rate. Having lesser time
for the reactants to spend in the reactor decreases the conversion.

There are difficulties and uncertainties with mathematical formulation and also caused
considerable problem with numerical and analytical treatment of resulting equation. Moreover,
in PBR, undesired thermal gradients may exist, poor temperature control, channeling may
occur, unit may be difficult to service and clean and the order of reaction is uncertain.
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.0 REFERENCES

Fogler, H. S., (2006). Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering. New Jersey: Pearson
Education, Inc

Öchsner A., Lucas F. M., Altenbach H. (2012). Materials with Complex Behavior II:
Properties, Non-Classical Materials and new Technologies. Springer: New York. pp551