Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

Vapor–liquid equilibria and critical points for the carbon

dioxide +1-pentanol and carbon dioxide +2-pentanol
systems at temperatures from 332 to 432 K
G. Silva-Oliver a , Luis A. Galicia-Luna a,∗ , S.I. Sandler b
a
Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Laboratorio de Termodinamica-Graduados-ESIQIE, Edif. Z,
Secc. 6, 1ER Piso, UPALM, C.P. 07738, Mexico, D.F., Mexico
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, Center for Molecular and Engineering Thermodynamics,
University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA
Received 9 January 2001; received in revised form 18 January 2002; accepted 21 January 2002

Abstract
Vapor–liquid equilibria and critical points of the systems: carbon dioxide+1-pentanol at (333.08, 343.69, 374.93,
414.23 and 426.86 K) up to 18.6 MPa and carbon dioxide+2-pentanol at (332.10, 343.61, 374.15, 397.56, 422.28 and
431.78 K) up to 15.7 MPa are reported at compositions near the critical point. An apparatus capable of measurement
up to 60 MPa and 523 K based on the static-analytic method has been used to perform fast determinations of the
vapor–liquid equilibria and critical pressures.
The Soave, Peng–Robinson and Patel–Teja equations of state with Wong–Sandler type mixing rules and tem-
perature independent parameters cannot predict the VLE of the carbon dioxide + 1-pentanol and carbon dioxide +
2-pentanol systems well (deviations >10% for pressure). Instead the EoS mixture parameters were fitted to the VLE
data at each temperature, separately. In this way the calculated VLE are found to be in good agreement with the
experimental data. © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: VLE apparatus; EoS; Mixing rules; VLE

1. Introduction

Knowledge of phase equilibria and volumetric properties (PvT) at high pressures is very important and
required for the design, simulation and optimization of processes related to supercritical fluid extraction.
The data generated from phase equilibrium studies at high-pressure must be reliable and accurate because
of the severity of conditions of the possible applications [1]. Also, measured critical phenomena play an
important role in the classification of phase diagrams.
∗
Corresponding author. Tel.: +52-5729-6000x55133; fax: +52-5586-2728.
E-mail addresses: lgalicia@termo.esiqie.ipn.mx, lagalicia@dsi.com.mx (L.A. Galicia-Luna).

0378-3812/02/$ – see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 8 - 3 8 1 2 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 2 4 - 9
162 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

A literature search has identified a gap in equilibrium data for binary systems containing CO2 and heavier
alkanols [2–4]. Surprisingly, the systems CO2 + 1-pentanol [5–9], +2-pentanol [10] have received little
attention, and all reported data are at low temperatures. Raeissi et al. [5], Lam et al. [7] reported interesting
results at low temperatures for the systems CO2 + 1-pentanol, and Raeissi et al. [5] found that this system
shows type-IV fluid phase behavior. Staby and Mollerup [9] reported results at 283.2, 313.2, 343.2 and
373.2 K. In this work VLE data for both systems are reported in the temperature range from 332 to 432 K
and in a pressure interval from 3.4 to 18.7 MPa.
The determination of VLE near critical points and critical points of the binary systems reported here
is a part of current project at the Thermodynamics Laboratory of the E.S.I.Q.I.E. (Instituto Politécnico
Nacional of Mexico). Its main objective is to perform systematic studies of PvT and phase equilibria
for binary mixtures containing CO2 and alkanols (from ethanol to decanol) in order to select the best
operating conditions for industrial supercritical applications [11–16].
An apparatus capable of measurement up to 60 MPa and 523.15 K has been used to study one,
two and three phase systems composed of either binary or ternary mixtures [11,14]. This apparatus,
based on the static-analytic method [11,17], involves a sampling-analysis process for determining phase
compositions.

2. Experimental method and apparatus

The apparatus used to obtain the vapor–liquid equilibrium and critical point data is the one described
by Galicia-Luna et al. [11]. In this work, uncertainties of measurements are typically within ± 0.03 K for
temperatures, ±0.04% (reading) for pressures and <1% for compositions. 1-Pentanol and 2-pentanol,
with certified purity of 99 and 98%, respectively, were obtained from Aldrich Chemical Co. Inc., carbon
dioxide and helium of 99.995% certified purity were obtained from Air Products-Infra. These chemicals
were used without further purification except for a careful degassing of 1-pentanol and 2-pentanol.
The pressure was measured by a transducer (Druck Model DPI 145, USA, accuracy: ±0.04% reading);
the temperature was determined using a pair of the platinum probes Pt100 (Specitec, France) connected to
a digital indicator (Automatic Systems F250, USA, accuracy ±0.03 K) and the calibration of the thermal
conductivity detector of the gas chromatograph for CO2 , 1-pentanol and 2-pentanol was achieved by
injecting known amounts of the pure components through calibrated syringes (uncertainties <1% for
compositions).
The experimental procedure of loading the pure components to the measuring cell is described by
Galicia et al. [11]. At a given temperature and pressure, at least five samples are taken for each phase in
order to check the repeatability of the sampling and the analyses. Isothermal phase envelopes are obtained
by consecutive pressure increments.
The procedure to determine the critical points is as follows. Small samples of the mixture are added
(to VLE) or removed (from near supercritical phase) to achieve small pressure variations until the over-
all range of the critical opalescence is less than ±0.005 MPa. This procedure normally takes about
3–4 h. One important experimental condition required for obtaining the critical point is that the menis-
cus must be in the middle of the cell and the capillary sampler in the vapor phase is very close to
the meniscus. The critical properties (Pc , Tc , zc ) are obtained with the same accuracy as vapor–liquid
equilibria by gas chromatographic analyses coupled to direct visual observation through the sapphire
windows.
 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172 163

2.1. Modeling

The binary VLE reported in this work were modeled using, the Patel and Teja equation of state EoS
[18], the Peng and Robinson EoS [19] and Soave-EoS [20] with Wong and Sandler mixing rules [21].
The Patel and Teja equation of state EoS is [18]:
RT a[T ]
P = − (1)
v − b v(v + b) + c(v − b)
This EoS with c = 0 is the Soave-EoS [20] and if c = b it is the Peng and Robinson EoS [19]. The
mixing rules used in this work for the PT-EoS [11,14], are given by:
a (3b + c)
= D (2)
RT 2
2Q + cD
b= (3)
2 − 3D


c= xi ci (4)
i

where,

xi ai  2

Gex
γ
D= − (5)
i
RT 3b i + c i RT


 a 
Q= xi xj b − (6)
i j
RT ij

The Wong and Sandler mixing rules [21] used with the PR-EoS [19] and Soave-EoS [20] are given as
follows:
Q
b=  Gex
 (7)
1 − i xi biaRT
i
− CRT
γ

ai Gex
γ
a = bRT xi + (8)
i
bi RT CRT
In Eq. (6) the combination rule used are:
 a  1  ai   aj 
Bij (T ) = b − = bi − + bj − (1 − kij ) (9)
RT ij 2 RT RT
In the above equations, ai , bi , and ci are the EoS pure component parameters, Gex g is the excess Gibbs
energy, xi the mole fraction
√ of the
√ component i in either the liquid or the vapor phase and C a numerical
constant equal to ln( 2 − 1)/ 2 and 1 for the PR-EoS and Soave-EoS, respectively. The original
parameters proposed by Peng and Robinson [19] and Soave [20] were used without modification. The
activity coefficient model used in Eqs. (5)–(8) is the NRTL model [22]:


j τji gji xj
Gg =
ex
xi  (10)
i k gki xk
164 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

δij
τij = (11)
RT
gij = exp(−αij τij ) (12)

3. Results and discussion

Data for the CO2 + 1-pentanol and CO2 + 2-pentanol systems vapor–liquid equilibrium were published
by Staby and Mollerup [9] at 283.2, 313.2, 343.2 and 373.2 K and by Lee and Lee [10] at 313.2 K. In
this work vapor–liquid equilibria near critical points and critical points are reported from 332 to 431 K
for both systems. Experimental VLE data and critical points are tabulated in Tables 1 and 2, and plotted
in Figs. 1 and 2 for the carbon dioxide + 1-pentanol and carbon dioxide + 2-pentanol binary systems,
respectively. Since the CO2 +1-pentanol and CO2 +2-pentanol systems present multiphase behavior near
the critical point, an experimental search was made and phase behavior similar to the CO2 + 1-butanol
(at 392.72 K, 16.789 MPa) and CO2 + 2-butanol (at 335.14 K, 10.488 MPa) systems was found. The
multiphase behavior for these binary mixtures is in agreement with multiphase behavior found by Raeissi
et al. [5].

Fig. 1. Vapor–liquid equilibria and critical points for CO2 + 1-pentanol at different temperatures.
 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172 165

Table 1
Vapor–liquid equilibria and critical points for the carbon dioxide (1) +1-pentanol (2) system at different temperatures
P (MPa) x1 y1 P (MPa) x1 y1

T = 333.08 K T = 414.23 K
7.090 0.3931 0.9914 13.873 0.5006 0.9412
8.182 0.4608 0.9816 15.448 0.5440 0.9272
9.561 0.5589 0.9799 17.583 0.6479 0.8854
10.900 0.6902 0.9727 18.559 0.7534 0.8285
11.625a 0.7855 0.9307 18.608 0.7923 0.8111
11.848a 0.8202 0.9355 18.610 0.8198 cb
11.931 0.8863 0.8953
11.936 0.8866 cb
T = 343.69K T = 426.86 K
12.180 0.6538 0.9614 3.563 0.1308 0.9269
13.217 0.7612 0.9279 5.507 0.2028 0.9385
13.545 0.8282 0.9168 7.454 0.2719 0.9439
13.590 0.8620 0.8890 9.440 0.3435 0.9374
13.609 0.8850 cb 11.965 0.4144 0.9337
13.960 0.4899 0.9204
16.184 0.5801 0.9002
17.765 0.6564 0.8805
18.270 0.6957 0.8580
18.455 0.7159 0.8434
18.579 0.7341 0.8261
18.637 0.7484 0.8074
18.665 0.7765 cb

T = 374.93K
14.512 0.5975 0.9622
15.625 0.6678 0.9470
16.553 0.7370 0.9127
16.922 0.7883 0.8795
16.981 0.8575
17.034 0.8401 cb
a
Multiphase behavior.
b
c: Critical point.

The VLE data and critical points for the carbon dioxide + 1-pentanol system at 333.08 K were fitted
with the PT-EoS [11,14] using the Wong and Sandler mixing rules [21]. The fit involves determination
of NRTL τ ij and the kij parameters. The parameter αij = 0.3 was used for all calculations in this work.
Data at 11.625 and 11.848 MPa were not used in the fit process because multiphase behavior at these
pressures had been found (Table 1).
The pure-component parameters (Tc , Pc and ω) for the PT-EoS used in this work are those given by
Reid et al. [23]. The VLE calculation algorithm was used in combination with the Marquardt–Levenberg
166 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

Table 2
Vapor–liquid equilibria and critical points for the system carbon dioxide (1) + 2-pentanol (2) system at different temperatures
P (MPa) x1 y1 P (MPa) x1 y1

T = 332.10 K T = 397.56 K
7.680 0.5356 0.9951 3.383 0.1630 0.9502
8.703 0.6351 0.9882 4.954 0.2360 0.9501
9.253 0.6937 0.9869 6.635 0.3118 0.9532
9.572 0.7421 0.9840 8.306 0.3898 0.9505
9.973a 0.8087 0.9603 9.798 0.4446 0.9479
10.212a 0.8468 0.9615 11.355 0.5128 0.9408
10.405 0.8938 0.9664 12.829 0.5852 0.9297
10.483 0.9426 0.9489 13.946 0.6432 0.9154
10.489 0.9459 cb 15.002 0.7135 0.9001
15.409 0.7484 0.8783
15.505 0.7625 0.8600
15.586 0.7805 0.8500
15.619 0.7943 0.8383
15.632 0.8180 cb
T = 343.61 K T = 422.28 K
11.280 0.7711 0.9626 11.656 0.5079 0.9048
11.459 0.7956 0.9511 12.666 0.5348 0.8960
11.817 0.8603 0.9382 13.440 0.5718 0.8905
11.922 0.9049 cb 13.910 0.5962 0.8866
14.610 0.6308 0.8740
15.012 0.6568 0.8577
15.621 0.7491 0.8162
15.731 0.7853 0.7924
15.735 0.7881 cb
T = 374.15 K T = 431.78 K
5.177 0.2622 0.9751 2.122 0.0880 0.8172
7.069 0.3512 0.9756 3.551 0.1496 0.8680
8.463 0.4256 0.9734 5.275 0.2239 0.8881
10.728 0.5422 0.9674 7.111 0.2997 0.8967
12.279 0.6325 0.9516 8.779 0.3720 0.8999
14.098 0.7449 0.9229 10.346 0.4404 0.8949
14.532 0.8007 0.8959 11.927 0.5105 0.8838
14.616 0.8229 0.8776 13.643 0.5736 0.8653
14.629 0.8376 0.8734 14.881 0.6394 0.8412
14.637 0.8555 cb 15.278 0.6733 0.8156
15.499 0.7069 0.7871
15.542 0.7233 0.7639
15.549 0.7289 0.7489
15.563 0.7384 cb
a
Multiphase behavior.
b
c: Critical point.
 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172 167

Fig. 2. Vapor–liquid equilibria and critical points for CO2 + 2-pentanol at different temperatures.

method (IMSL [24]) and the objective function:

 
Nd Nc exp 2 2


yijcalc − yij Pjcal − Pj
exp
F =  exp + exp
 (12)
j =1 i=1
yij Pj

The optimized parameters for the PT-EoS [17], PR-EoS [18] and Soave-EoS [19] with the NRTL mixing
rule at 333.08 K for the system CO2 (1)+1-pentanol (2) were used to predict the vapor–liquid equilibrium
at all temperatures, but the results obtained showed a large deviation for all models. Since it was found that
the three models give similar results for this system, the NRTL parameter τ ij and the kij , were fitted for
the PT-EoS at each temperature of VLE measurements (Table 3). Also, the parameters fitted at 333.08 K
were used to predict the two pressures measured at 343.69 K. The results are reported at the Table 4.
The percent error and the standard deviation (S.T.D.) for the equilibrium pressures and the vapor phase
compositions are given in Table 4. Also with the same set of parameters, the vapor–liquid equilibria
reported by Jennings et al. [6] are predicted at 337.4 K very accurately (pressures deviations <0.46%,
see Table 5 and Fig. 3). The VLE data for the CO2 (1) + 1-pentanol (2) system reported in this work at
343.69 and 374.93 K agree well with those published by Staby and Mollerup [9] at 343.2 and 373.2 K,
respectively, (Fig. 4).
168 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

Table 3
Optimized parameters of the Gex model (NRTL) used in the Patel and Teja EoSa
T (K) k12 τ 12 (J/mol) τ 21 (J/mol)
333.08 0.5512 5158.49 −1503.21
343.69 0.5512 5158.49 −1503.21
374.93 0.5219 5547.41 −2312.21
414.23 0.5119 4889.12 −2464.40
426.86 0.5106 4620.34 −2672.34
a
Optimization on vapor–liquid equilibrium data for the CO2 (1) + 1-pentanol (2) system.

Table 4
Optimized parameters of the Gex model (NRTL) used in the Patel and Teja EoSa
T (K) k12 τ 12 (J/mol) τ 21 (J/mol)
332.10 0.5289 6873.56 −2485.63
343.61 0.5289 6873.56 −2485.63
374.15 0.5442 5075.02 −2298.95
397.56 0.5133 6474.25 −3278.40
422.28 0.5104 6257.75 −3556.50
431.78 0.5110 6053.47 −3577.67
a
Optimization on vapor–liquid equilibrium data for the CO2 (1) + 2-pentanol (2) system.

Table 5
Error percentage and standard deviation for the vapor pressure and vapor phase composition related the CO2 (1) + 1-pentanol
(2) and CO2 (1) + 2-pentanol (2) systems
T (K) EoS % Error P % Error y(1) S.T.D. P S.T.D. y(1)
CO2 (1) +1-pentanol (2)
333.08 PT 0.06 0.85 0.07 0.011
333.08 SRK 0.15 0.88 0.22 0.011
333.08 PR 0.15 0.81 0.23 0.010
343.69 PT 1.90 5.76 3.81 0.086
374.93 PT 0.24 0.60 0.47 0.008
414.23 PT 1.33 0.70 2.52 0.008
426.86 PT 1.10 0.52 1.94 0.006
337.41a PT 0.46 0.19 0.49 0.002
CO2 (1)+2-pentanol (2)
332.10 PT 0.56 0.23 0.72 0.003
332.10 SRK 0.37 0.31 0.49 0.004
332.10 PR 0.37 0.21 0.49 0.003
343.61b PT 1.14 1.32 1.64 0.016
374.15 PT 1.31 1.40 1.65 0.021
397.56 PT 0.59 0.36 0.79 0.005
422.28 PT 1.32 0.56 2.04 0.007
431.78 PT 0.86 0.87 1.17 0.011
a
Jennings et al. [6].
b
Values

predicted

using parameters fitted at 332.10 K. The

errors are defined by the following equations: Percentage error
Nd  Pi −Pical  Nd  y1i
exp cal 
exp
−y1i 
i=1  Pi
exp 
 i=1  exp
y1i


P = Nd
× 100 and Percentage error y(1) = Nd
× 100.
 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172 169

Fig. 3. Vapor–liquid equilibrium data for carbon dioxide + 1-pentanol: (䊊) calculated by PT-EoS with the NRTL parameters
fitted at 333.08 K; (䊉) Jennings et al. [6] at 337.4 K.

The properties of 2-pentanol, T BOIL = 392.1 K [25], T C = 560.3 K [26], and P C = 36.75 bar [26]
were used in this work to calculate the acentric factor from the Eqs. (2)–(4) given by Reid et al. [23],
obtaining ωi = 0.5775 and correlating the NRTL parameters for the three EoS mentioned above to VLE
of CO2 (1) + 2-pentanol (2) systems. The optimized parameters for the PT-EoS [18], PR-EoS [19] and
Soave-EoS [20] with NRTL mixing rule at 332.10 K for the system CO2 (1) + 2-pentanol (2) presented
at the Table 4 were used to predict the vapor–liquid equilibria at higher temperatures and the results
obtained gave errors of >10% in pressure for all models. Consequently, instead the data were correlated
separately at each temperature and as all models give similar results only optimized parameters for the
PT-EoS are reported. Since at 343.61 K only three pressures are reported, parameters were not fitted at this
temperature; instead predictions were made for these data with the parameters that had been optimized
to the 332.10 K data. The percent error and the S.T.D. for the total pressure and vapor phase composition
are given in Table 5. Because a multiphase behavior was found visually for the CO2 + 2-pentanol at
332.10 K at pressures 9.973 and 10.212 MPa (Table 2), these points were not used in the process of fitting
the NRTL parameters.
As multiphase behavior appears for the CO2 + 1-pentanol and CO2 + 2-pentanol, an experimental
search was also made of the carbon dioxide + 1-butanol and carbon dioxide + 2-butanol systems re-
ported previously [14]. Near critical points, multiphase behavior was found at 399.66 K and 16.783 MPa
for carbon dioxide + 1-butanol, and at 334.97 K and 10.488 MPa for carbon dioxide + 2-butanol,
respectively.
170 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

Fig. 4. Vapor–liquid equilibrium data for carbon dioxide + 1-pentanol: the experimental data reported in this work at (䊊) 343.69;
() 374.93 K; and those published by Staby and Mollerup [9] at (䊉) 343.2; (䉲) 373.2 K.

4. Conclusions

New VLE data and critical points of the systems carbon dioxide + 1-pentanol and carbon dioxide +
2-pentanol at high temperatures are reported. Multiphase behavior was found for the binary mixtures
of carbon dioxide separately with 1-butanol, 2-butanol, 1-pentanol and 2-pentanol; results that are in
agreement with the multiphase behavior found by Raeissi et al. [5]. These type of data are important
for modeling and understanding the global phase behavior of the binary mixtures considered here and a
detailed study of VLE near critical points is required to understand the phase behavior at high temperatures.
Although, it was found that the PT-EoS [18], PR-EoS [19] and Soave-EoS [20] with NRTL mixing rule
give similar results for both systems, calculated values are reported using the Patel and Teja equation of
state with the Wong and Sandler mixing rules and they agree well with the experimental results (deviations
<2% for pressure) [11,14].

List of symbols
a equation of state energy parameter
b equation of state excluded volume parameter
B second virial coefficient
c Patel and Teja EOS parameter
D mixture parameter, defined in Eq. (5)
g NRTL model parameter
 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172 171

G excess Gibbs energy

F depending function of acentric factor
FOBJ objetive function
k binary interaction coefficient
Nc number of components
Nd number of experimental data points
P pressure
Q mixture parameter, defined in Eq. (6)
R universal gas constant
T temperature
v molar volume
x mol fraction (liquid phase)
y mol fraction (vapor phase)

Greek letters
α NRTL model parameter
δ NRTL model parameter
τ NRTL model parameter

Superscripts
calc calculated value
ex excess property
exp experimental value

Subscripts
i, j molecular species
exp experimental vapor pressure
y activity coefficient

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to NSF, CONACYT (Project 26432-A, C-30042-U) and IPN for their financial
support.

References

[1] D. Bush, in: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Supercritical Fluids, Atlanta Georgia, USA, 8–11 April
2000, on CD.
[2] D. Richon, H. Renon, Fluid Phase Equilibria 14 (1983) 235–243.
[3] R.E. Fornari, P. Alessi, I. Kikic, Fluid Phase Equilibria 57 (1990) 1–33.
[4] R. Dohrn, G. Brunner, Fluid Phase Equilibria 106 (1995) 213–282.
[5] S. Raeissi, K. Gauter, C.J. Peters, Fluid Phase Equilibria 147 (1998) 239–249.
[6] D.W. Jennings, F. Chang, V. Bazaan, A.S. Teja, J. Chem. Eng. Data 37 (1992) 337–338.
[7] D.H. Lam, A. Jangkamolkulchai, K.D. Luks, Fluid Phase Equilibria 60 (1990) 131–141.
172 G. Silva-Oliver et al. / Fluid Phase Equilibria 200 (2002) 161–172

[8] C.J. Peters, K. Gauter, Chem. Rev. 99 (1999) 419–431.

[9] A. Staby, J. Mollerup, J. Supercrit. Fluids 6 (1993) 15–19.
[10] H.S. Lee, H. Lee, Fluid Phase Equilibria 150/151 (1998) 695–701.
[11] L.A. Galicia-Luna, A. Ortega-Rodriguez, D. Richon, J. Chem. Eng. Data 45 (2) (2000) 265–271.
[12] J.L. Mendoza de la Cruz, L.A. Galicia-Luna, ELDATA: international electron, J. Phys.-Chem. Data 5 (1999) 157–164.
[13] A. Zúñiga-Moreno, L.A. Galicia-Luna, ELDATA, Int. Electr. J. Phys.-Chem. Data, 2001, in press.
[14] G. Silva-Oliver, L.A. Galicia-Luna, Fluid Phase Equilibria 182 (2001) 145–156.
[15] A. Zúñiga-Moreno, L.A. Galicia-Luna, Densities of 1-propanol and 2-propanol via a vibrating tube densimeter from 313
to 363 K and up to 25 MPa, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 2001, in press.
[16] A. Zúñiga-Moreno, L.A. Galicia-Luna, Compressed liquid densities of carbon dioxide + ethanol mixtures at four
compositions via a vibrating tube densimeter up to 363 K and 25 MPa, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 2001, in press.
[17] S. Laugier, D. Richon, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 57 (1986) 469–472.
[18] N.C. Patel, A.S. Teja, Chem. Eng. Sci. 37 (1982) 463.
[19] D.Y. Peng, D.B. Robinson, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 15 (1976) 59.
[20] G. Soave, Chem. Eng. Sc. (1972) 1197.
[21] D.S.H. Wong, S.I. Sandler, AIChE J. 38 (1992) 671.
[22] H. Renon, J.M. Prausnitz, AIChE J. 14 (1968) 135–144.
[23] R.C. Reid, J.M. Prausnitz, B.E. Poling, The Properties of Gases and Liquids, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1986.
[24] IMSL, The IMSL Library, IMSL Inc., Houston, 2 (1979).
[25] R.C. Weast, J.G. Grasselli, CRC Handbook of Data on Organic Compounds, 2nd Edition, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL,
1989, p. 1.
[26] M.T. Gude, A.S. Teja, J. Chem. Eng. Data 40 (1995) 1025–1036.