Supporting Information

Refractive Index and Vapor−Liquid Equilibrium Data for the Binary

Systems of Anisole with Xylene Isomers at 93.13 kPa
Satyajeet S. Yadav‡, Nilesh A. Mali*†, Sunil S. Joshi†
† Chemical Engineering and Process Development Division, CSIR-National Chemical Laboratory,
Pune-411008, Maharashtra, India
‡ Chemical Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed
University, Pune-411030, Maharashtra, India

I. Comparison of VLE data of the present work with the literature data for binary mixture of
anisole with p-xylene and ethylbenzene.
Table S1: Experimental VLE data for p-xylene (1)-anisole (2) pair of the present work and
Sood et al work.2
Sood et al data at 101.325 kPa Present work data at 93.13 kPaa
No. t/ K x1 y1 t/ K x1 y1
1 411.3267 1 1 423.38 0 0
2 411.9966 0.9 0.95 421.91 0.058 0.095
3 413.3963 0.796 0.857 421.11 0.092 0.146
4 413.6963 0.767 0.839 419.14 0.185 0.271
5 414.5161 0.669 0.756 417.06 0.298 0.403
6 415.5159 0.6 0.68 415.41 0.400 0.507
7 416.0858 0.553 0.663 414.02 0.496 0.597
8 417.4155 0.45 0.56 412.29 0.630 0.713
9 417.8654 0.428 0.541 411.39 0.706 0.775
10 418.0954 0.428 0.547 410.32 0.804 0.852
11 419.3151 0.325 0.434 409.26 0.907 0.931
12 420.045 0.296 0.434 408.89 0.946 0.959
13 421.8746 0.202 0.309 408.37 1 1
14 422.3045 0.162 0.252
15 423.5143 0.114 0.184
16 424.1142 0.084 0.138
17 426.6137 0 0
a
Standard uncertainties u are u(x1) = 0.001, u(y1) = 0.001,
u(T) = 0.1 K, u(P) = 0.1 kPa.
 Supporting Information

426.0

421.0
Temperature, K

416.0

411.0

406.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X1, Y1

Figure S1. T-x,y plot for p-xylene (1) + anisole (2); ∎, T−y (present work at 93.13 kPa); ♦, T−x
(present work at 93.13 kPa); ▲, T−y (Sood et al work at 101 kPa); ⅹ, T−x (Sood et al work at
101 kPa); — — —, NRTL model predictions at 93.13 kPa with parameters estimated using
Sood et al work at 101 kPa

Table S2: Experimental VLE data for ethylbenzene (1)-anisole (2) pair of the present work and
Sood et al work.2
Sood et al Data Present worka
No. t/ K x1 y1 t/ K x1 y1
1 408.9672 1 1 423.38 0 0
2 409.6871 0.954 0.989 421.93 0.042 0.079
3 410.5069 0.909 0.95 420.58 0.088 0.152
4 410.8868 0.885 0.922 418.10 0.178 0.284
5 412.6665 0.744 0.837 415.85 0.278 0.404
6 413.7962 0.654 0.744 413.33 0.416 0.545
7 416.9156 0.468 0.55 412.07 0.493 0.610
8 417.9654 0.388 0.499 410.43 0.610 0.707
9 420.7848 0.232 0.32 408.90 0.734 0.799
10 421.0148 0.215 0.325 407.69 0.845 0.885
11 422.6345 0.133 0.235 407.04 0.911 0.935
12 423.4543 0.095 0.205 406.57 0.959 0.971
13 424.6941 0.063 0.115 406.23 1 1
14 426.6137 0 0
a
Standard uncertainties u are u(x1) = 0.001, u(y1) = 0.001,
u(T) = 0.1 K, u(P) = 0.1 kPa.
 Supporting Information

430.0

425.0

420.0
Temperature, K

415.0

410.0

405.0

400.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X1, Y1

Figure S2. T-x,y plot for ethylbenzene (1) + anisole (2); ∎, T−y (present work at 93.13 kPa); ♦,
T−x (present work at 93.13 kPa); ▲, T−y (Sood et al work at 101 kPa); ⅹ, T−x (Sood et al
work at 101 kPa); — — —, NRTL model predictions at 93.13 kPa with parameters estimated
using Sood et al work at 101 kPa
 Supporting Information
II. Refractive Index (nD) vs Mole Fraction data for various binary pairs of anisole with xylene
isomers.
Table S3: Measured Refractive Indices at 293.15 K and 93.13 kPa for various binary mixtures
of anisole and p-xylenea
sr. no. p-xylene mole fraction (x1) nD
1 0.0000 1.5170
2 0.0499 1.5157
3 0.1387 1.5138
4 0.1684 1.5131
5 0.2124 1.5122
6 0.2656 1.5110
7 0.3055 1.5101
8 0.4128 1.5078
9 0.4494 1.5070
10 0.4497 1.5070
11 0.5122 1.5057
12 0.5626 1.5046
13 0.6095 1.5036
14 0.8055 1.4995
15 0.8904 1.4978
16 0.9613 1.4964
17 1.0000 1.4956
a
Standard uncertainties u are u(T) = 0.1 K, u(x) = 0.001, u(nD) = 0.0001, u(P) = 0.1 kPa

1.520

1.515
Refractive Index, nD

1.510

1.505

1.500

1.495
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Mole fraction of p-xylene (x1)

Figure S3: Calibration curve for p-xylene (1) + anisole (2) system. ∎, measured nD at 293.15 K
vs. mole fraction of p-xylene; ---, third order polynomial
 Supporting Information
Table S4: Measured Refractive Indices at 293.15 K and 93.13 kPa for various m-xylene mole
fractionsa
sr. no. m-xylene mole fraction (x1) nD
1 0.0000 1.5170
2 0.0756 1.5154
3 0.1836 1.5131
4 0.2143 1.5125
5 0.2716 1.5113
6 0.3152 1.5104
7 0.4196 1.5082
8 0.4711 1.5072
9 0.5086 1.5064
10 0.6083 1.5045
11 0.6746 1.5031
12 0.7383 1.5019
13 0.8189 1.5002
14 0.8552 1.4997
15 0.9339 1.4982
16 1.0000 1.4970
a
Standard uncertainties u are u(T) = 0.1 K, u(x) = 0.001, u(nD) = 0.0001, u(P) = 0.1 kPa

1.520

1.515
Refractive Index, nD

1.510

1.505

1.500

1.495
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Mole fraction of M-Xylene

Figure S4: Calibration curve for m-xylene (1) + anisole (2) system. ∎, measured nD at 293.15 K
vs. mole fraction of m-xylene; ---, third order polynomial
 Supporting Information
Table S5: Measured Refractive Indices at 293.15 K and 93.13 kPa for various o-xylene mole
fractionsa
sr. no. o-xylene mole fraction (x1) nD
1 0.0000 1.5170
2 0.0825 1.5159
3 0.1066 1.5156
4 0.1439 1.5151
5 0.1945 1.5144
6 0.2976 1.5131
7 0.3812 1.5120
8 0.4796 1.5109
9 0.6170 1.5092
10 0.6785 1.5084
11 0.7801 1.5072
12 0.9159 1.5057
13 0.9329 1.5056
14 1.0000 1.5048
a
Standard uncertainties u are u(T) = 0.1 K, u(x) = 0.001, u(nD) = 0.0001, u(P) = 0.1 kPa

1.518

1.516

1.514
Refractive Index, nD

1.512

1.510

1.508

1.506

1.504
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Mole fraction of O-Xylene

Figure S5: Calibration curve for o-xylene (1) + anisole (2) system. ∎, measured nD at 293.15 K
vs. mole fraction of o-xylene; ---, third order polynomial
 Supporting Information
Table S6: Measured Refractive Indices at 293.15 K and 93.13 kPa for various ethylbenzene
mole fractionsa
sr. no. ethylbenzene mole fraction (x1) nD
1 0.0000 1.5170
2 0.0762 1.5152
3 0.1494 1.5136
4 0.1767 1.5130
5 0.2118 1.5122
6 0.2442 1.5115
7 0.2691 1.5110
8 0.3432 1.5093
9 0.4041 1.5080
10 0.4120 1.5077
11 0.4651 1.5066
12 0.5183 1.5055
13 0.6208 1.5033
14 0.6885 1.5019
15 0.7927 1.4998
16 0.9056 1.4975
17 0.9514 1.4965
18 1.0000 1.4955
a
Standard uncertainties u are u(T) = 0.1 K, u(x) = 0.001, u(nD) = 0.0001, u(P) = 0.1 kPa

1.520

1.515
Refractive Index, nD

1.510

1.505

1.500

1.495
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Mole fraction of Ethylbenzene

Figure S6: Calibration curve for ethylbenzene (1) + anisole (2) system. ∎, measured nD at
293.15 K vs. mole fraction of ethylbenzene; ---, third order polynomial
 Supporting Information
III. Comparison of experimental and model predicted relative volatility (α) data for various
binary pairs of anisole with xylene isomers.

0.80

0.75

0.70

0.65
α21

0.60

0.55

0.50
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
X1
Figure S7. Relative volatility comparison for the p-xylene (1) + anisole (2) system; ∎,
experimental; — —, ±5% α-values; —, Wilson model based α-values; ̶ ̶ ̶ , NRTL model
based α-values; ⋯, UNIQUAC model based α-values.

0.80

0.75

0.70

0.65
α21

0.60

0.55

0.50
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
X1

Figure S8. Relative volatility comparison for the m-xylene (1) + anisole (2) system; ∎,
experimental; — —, ±5% α-values; —, Wilson model based α-values; ̶ ̶ ̶ , NRTL model
based α-values; ⋯, UNIQUAC model based α-values.
 Supporting Information
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.85
0.80
0.75
α21

0.70
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
X1

Figure S9. Relative volatility comparison for the o-xylene (1) + anisole (2) system; ∎,
experimental; — —, ±5% α-values; —, Wilson model based α-values; ̶ ̶ ̶ , NRTL model
based α-values; ⋯, UNIQUAC model based α-values.

0.90

0.80

0.70

0.60
α21

0.50

0.40

0.30
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
X1

Figure S10. Relative volatility comparison for the ethylbenzene (1) + anisole (2) system; ∎,
experimental; — —, ±5% α-values; —, Wilson model based α-values; ̶ ̶ ̶ , NRTL model
based α-values; ⋯, UNIQUAC model based α-values.
 Supporting Information
IV. Standard uncertainty calculations:

The uncertainty calculations were performed using Type-A evaluation of standard uncertainty.

In this, for a input quantity of Xi for which ‘n’ independent measurement were performed, Xi,k of Xi
under similar conditions of experimental measurements, the input estimate xi is given by equation
(1).
𝑛
1
𝑥𝑖 = 𝑋�𝑖 = � 𝑋𝑖,𝑘 (1)
𝑛
𝑘=1

The standard uncertainty u(xi) of xi is evaluated as standard deviation of mean as given by equation
(2).
𝑛 0.5
1 2
𝑢(𝑥𝑖 ) = 𝑠(𝑋�𝑖 ) = � ��𝑋𝑖,𝑘 − 𝑋�𝑖 � � (2)
𝑛(𝑛 − 1)
𝑘=1