RESULTS

Concentration Conversion, (-dCa/dt) ln(-dCa/dt) ln (Ca) 1/Ca

of
X (%)
Temperature
Time NaOH, CNaOH
Conductivity (from
(°C) (M)
(min) (mS/cm) calibration
TI-101 (from curve)
calibration
curve)

0 38.4 10.96 0.049816 1.0756 0 0 -2.999419061 20.07387185

5 37.5 10.83 0.048893 2.9138 0.0001846 - -3.018121042 20.45282556

8.597319236

10 38.6 11.26 0.051946 -3.1664 -0.0006106 7.401068478 -2.957550562 19.25076041

15 40.4 10.50 0.04655 7.58 0.0010792 - -3.067228275 21.48227712

6.831535253

20 42.0 10.28 0.044988 10.6908 0.0003124 -8.07122614 -3.101359491 22.22814973

25 43.4 10.82 0.048822 3.0552 -0.0007668 7.173284547 -3.019574248 20.48256933

30 44.5 10.97 0.049887 0.9342 -0.000213 8.454218392 -2.997994831 20.04530238

Temperature: 50C

Concentration of Conversion, (-dCa/dt) ln(-dCa/dt) ln (Ca) 1/Ca

Temperature
Time NaOH, CNaOH (M) X (%)
Conductivity
(°C)
(min) (mS/cm) (from calibration (from
TI-101 curve) calibration
curve)

0 38.4 10.96 0.049816 1.0756 0 0 -2.999419061 20.07387185

5 37.5 10.83 0.048893 2.9138 0.0001846 -8.597319236 -3.018121042 20.45282556

10 38.6 11.26 0.051946 -3.1664 -0.0006106 7.401068478 -2.957550562 19.25076041

15 40.4 10.50 0.04655 7.58 -0.0010792 6.831535253 -3.067228275 21.48227712

20 42.0 10.28 0.044988 10.6908 0.0003124 -8.07122614 -3.101359491 22.22814973

25 43.4 10.82 0.048822 3.0552 -0.0007668 7.173284547 -3.019574248 20.48256933

30 44.5 10.97 0.049887 0.9342 -0.000213 8.454218392 -2.997994831 20.04530238

Temperature: 60C

Concentration Conversion, (-dCa/dt) ln(-dCa/dt) ln (Ca)

of X (%)
Temperature
Time Conductivity NaOH, CNaOH (M) (from
(°C)
(min) (mS/cm) (from calibration
TI-101
calibration curve)
curve)
0 38.6 7.69 0.026599 47.3134 0 0 -3.626881658 37

5 39.6 8.05 0.029155 42.223 -0.0005112 7.578749655 -3.535128854 34

10 42.3 7.72 0.0268192 46.8892 0.00046716 -7.668838747 -3.61863723 37

15 45.1 7.99 0.028729 43.0714 -0.00038196 7.870194667 -3.549848213 37

20 47.4 7.82 0.027522 45.4752 0.00059536 -7.426344293 -3.592769594 36

25 49.5 7.96 0.028516 43.4956 -0.0001988 8.523211264 -3.557289946 35

30 51.1 7.95 0.028445 43.637 0.0000142 -11.16226859 -3.559782881 35

GRAPH

Graph between Concentration Vs Conductivity

0.06

0.05
f(x) = 0.01 x − 0.03
0.04
Concentration

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Conductivity

Figure 1 – Concentration of NaOH (M) vs Conductivity

Slope = 0.0071 , y-intercept= 0.0280

Conversion Vs Conductivity
120%

100%
f(x) = − 0.14 x + 1.56
80%
Conversion

60%

40%

20%

0%
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Conductivity

Figure 2 – Conversion vs Conductivity

Slope = -0.1414 , y-intercept= 1.5605

 Graph between ln(-dCa/dt) Vs lnCa
4
3
2
ln(-dCa/dt) 1
0
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
-1
f(x) = − 0.14 x − 2.17
-2
-3
-4
lnCa

Figure 3 – ln [-dCa/dt] vs ln C A @ 40 C

Slope = -0.1372 , y-intercept= -2.17

Order of Reaction, 

ln [-dCa/dt] =  [ln CA]+ ln k

 = slope, m

 = -0.1372

Rate Constant

ln [-dCa/dt] =  [ln CA] + ln k

ln k = C

k = ln-1 C

k = ln-1 [-2.17]

k = -1.2908
 Graph between ln(-dCa/dt) Vs ln Ca
10
8
f(x) = 74.22 x + 226.26 6
4
Axis Title
2
0
-3.12 -3.1 -3.08 -3.06 -3.04 -3.02 -3 -2.98 -2.96 -2.94
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
Axis Title

Figure 4 – ln [-dCa/dt] vs ln C A @ 50 C

Slope = -74.223 , y-intercept= 226.26

Order of Reaction, 

ln [-dCa/dt] =  [ln CA]+ ln k

 = slope, m

 = -74.223

Rate Constant

ln [-dCa/dt] =  [ln CA] + ln k

ln k = C

k = ln-1 C

k = ln-1 [226.26]

k = 0.1844
 Graph between ln(-dCa/dt) Vs ln Ca
10

5
f(x) = 123.31 x + 440.79

ln(-dCa/dt) 0
-3.64 -3.63 -3.62 -3.61 -3.6 -3.59 -3.58 -3.57 -3.56 -3.55 -3.54 -3.53
-5

-10

-15
ln Ca

Figure 5– ln [-dCa/dt] vs ln CA @ 60 C

Slope =123.31 , y-intercept= 440.79

Order of Reaction, 

ln [-dCa/dt] =  [ln CA]+ ln k

 = slope, m

 = 123.31

Rate Constant

ln [-dCa/dt] =  [ln CA] + ln k

ln k = C

k = ln-1 C

k = ln-1 [440.79]

k = 0.1642
 Graph between 1 Ca Vs Time
35
30
25
20

1 Ca
15 f(x) = 2.52 x − 36.76
10
5
0
19 19.5 20 20.5 21 21.5 22 22.5
Time

Fiure 6- 1/Ca Vs Time for 40 celcious

Slope = 2.516 , Intercept- y =36.763

K =2.516

Graph between 1 Ca Vs Time

35
30
25
20
1 Ca

15 f(x) = 2.52 x − 36.76

10
5
0
19 19.5 20 20.5 21 21.5 22 22.5
Time

Figure 7- 1Ca Vs Time for 50 celcious

Slope = 2.516 , Intercept- y= 36.763

K=2.516
 Graph between 1 Ca VsTime
35
30
25
20
f(x) = − 3.27 x + 133.27

1 Ca
15
10
5
0
34 34.5 35 35.5 36 36.5 37 37.5 38
Time

Figure 8- 1Ca Vs Time for 60 celcious

Slope = -3.2718, Intercept- y= 133.27

K= 3.2718

Graph between ln k and 1/T

1.4
1.2
1 f(x) = − 27.99 x + 1.58
0.8
ln k

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03
1/T

Figure 9 – ln k vs 1/T

Slope =-27.989, y-intercept= 1.5793

Saponification Reaction’s Activation Energy, E

ln k = (-Ea/R)(1/T) + ln A

Y = mX +C

(-Ea/R) = Slope, m=-27.989

Ea = -R  m
 =5.1112

Arrhenius Constant, A

ln k = (-Ea/R)(1/T) + ln A

Y = mX +C

ln A = C

A = ln-1 C

A = ln-1 [1.5793]

A = 2.1883

DISCUSSIONS

The purpose of the Batch Reaction Process were to investigate the liquid phase reaction kinetics in a
batch reactor, the behavior of a batch reactor under various operating conditions in terms of
conversion, and the effect of temperature on the reaction in a CSTR.

The experiment was begun by preparing the chemicals 9L of 0.1 M Et (Ac) solution and 9L of 0.1 M NaOH
solution. Then, necessary steps were made to ready the batch reactor unit. 3L of 0.1 M Et (Ac) solution
and 9L of 0.1 M NaOH solution were poured into the reactor R1 through the charge port on the vessel
cover. Then, with intervals of 5 minutes, a sample was retrieved in order to determine the conductivity
value at temperature of 40 C, until the conductivity readings stabilized. The experiment was then
repeated with temperatures of 50 C and 60 C. The conductivity values were continuously recorded
until minute 30. Trend graphs were plotted to represent the trend of results obtained.

Based on the result obtained, the temperature and conductivity for each of temperature, 40C, 50C,
and 60 C at 0 minutes till 30 minutes were recorded in each table respectively. Based on the figure 1
and 2, it was a standard calibration curve of Concentration (M) against Conductivity (mS/cm) (figure 1)
and Conversion (%) against Conductivity (mS/cm) (figure 2) was plotted from the Appendix A. Then,
from the calibration graph, a linear equation y = 0.0071x – 0.028 and y = -0.1414x + 1.5605 were
obtained. From the equation, the data for Concentration of NaOH and Conversion (%) was calculated.
Next, the values for -dCa/dt, ln (-dCa/dt), ln (Ca), 1/Ca, and 1/T were obtained through calculations using
the raw data from the results table and related trend graphs were generated to portray the trend.

Basically , from the graphs in for – ln [-dCa/dt] Vs ln CA for 40 C, 50 C and 60C in figure 3, figure 4 and
figure 5 respectively ,the slope of the graph showed value at 0.1372, -74.223 and 123.31 respectively.
Meanwhile the value for y-intercept showed were -2.17, -226.26 and 440.79 respectively. From the
slope and y-intercept of the graph for all the temperatures, the value of order of reaction, and rate
constant, k can be determined. The value for order of reaction,  for 40 C, 50 C and 60C were –
o.1372, -74.223 and 123.31 respectively while the rate constant ,k value were -1.2908, 0.1844 and
0.1642 respectively.

Besides that, from the graph for Conversion against Time at 40C, 50C and 60C in figure 6,figure 7 and
figure 8 respectively, it can be observe that for all the three graph and data gather , there were really
different as all the data are increasing and decreasing throughout the time given. Thus , the data that
were taken were completely denied the collision theory which state that, for a reaction to take place,
the particles of the substances that are reacting have to collide. If they collide with the enough energy
then the particles will reacts. When the temperature in the reaction was increases, the particles will
move faster. Thus, the collision take place will become higher .This will cause the molecules to collide
with each other producing more energy, in relation to higher reaction rate. Therefore, as the
temperature increases, the rate of conversion is higher too.

Next , based on the graph plotted in figure 6, figure 7 and figure 8 for 1/Ca against time for 40C,50C
and 60C, the rate constant, k was determine from the slope value. It was then, the saponification
reaction’s activation energy, Ea and Arrhenius constant, A was calculated from the slope and intercept
values by using Arrhenius equation. From the graphs generated in figure 9, the value for Activation
Energy, Ea calculated was 5.1112 and a value of 2.1883 was obtained for the Arrhenius Constant.

There were several advantages of using the batch reactors in chemical reaction. The batch reactor has
high conversion per unit volume for one pass. Furthermore, the flexibility of the operation same reactor
can produce one product at one time and a different product for the next. It is also easy to clean
compare to the other reactors. However, the batch reactor also has its own disadvantages such as high
operating cost. Besides that, the product quality was more variable than with continuous operation.

There were several possibility errors that may contribute to the inaccurate result and abnormal trend of
graph throughout the experiment. Firstly, the chemical preparation of dilution NaOH and Ethyl Acetate
may not accurate that leads to disrupt results.Secondly, the Batch may be contaminating with other
chemicals that leads to abnormal results. Other than that, the wires or other equipment involved may
be faulty. When this happens, the panel will not display the correct value and could even disrupt the
whole process of the experiment. Other than that, time may be insufficient, causing required data to not
be obtained. With this problem, current data will not be enough, and will affect the resulted trend
graph.