Reactor Design

Design Laboratory - Sarkeys E111

September 1st, 8th, 15th & 22nd, 2015
CHE 4262-002 Group E

Eric Henderson
Nadezda Mamedova
Andy Schultz
Xiaorong Zhang
1
Executive Summary – Nadezda Mamedova

Purpose: The purpose of this experiment was to design the most efficient system that could
saponify a waste stream of 0.12 M ethyl acetate, flowing at 65 million pounds per year, into
sodium acetate using sodium hydroxide. The engineers assigned have assumed that the reactor
will be an addition to an existing plant with the space available to add the reactor. Further, our
group assumed the plant is located near a facility which uses our byproduct, the sodium acetate.

How information was obtained: The group compared the efficiency of a batch reactor, a CSTR,
and a PFR in the laboratory at temperatures of 10°C, 20°C, and 25°C, by using concentrations of
0.10M sodium hydroxide and ethyl acetate. The conversion was calculated using the conductivity
of the mixture at various time points during the reaction. This information was then use to select
the most efficient reactor style. The group then used the information from that reactor to scale up
the design to industrial setting.

Key findings: It was concluded that the CSTR setup was more efficient than the batch design or
the PFR. Our data indicated that the results gathered were accurate with an error of less than 5%.
The overall cost of the reactor is $2,819,779.37for the first year.

Disclaimers and Recommendations: The results indicate the use of a CSTR reactor is most
economical. For future use, the group would be able to make more accurate cost estimations with
more information about the requirements for the reactor: pressure range, temperature range, and
expected disturbances. Since these parameters were not specified, our team took the liberty of
assuming no disturbances, atmospheric pressure, and using 10°C-25°C as the temperature
operating range.

2
Introduction – Nadezda Mamedova

Our engineers are currently working on developing a reactor design for an economical reactor
system that will convert ethyl acetate to sodium acetate by saponification. Sodium acetate is used
heavily in both domestic and industrial settings such as personal hygiene (soap), detergents,
paints, adhesives, herbicides and insecticides.1 For the purpose of this laboratory experiment, the
group focused on converting a 0.12M waste steam of ethyl acetate into sodium acetate. The
reactor will need to process 65 million pounds per year of ethyl acetate. The objective was to
determine the most economical reactor design.

The small system in our laboratory allows for testing of two reactor designs, a batch reactor and
a continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR). Another reactor design, the plug flow reactor, can
also be considered by doing calculations on data gathered from the batch CSTR. The data from
the experiments on the efficiency of the three reactor designs and determined a final design from
comparing the economic benefits of each reactor when scaled up to industrial use.

Assumptions include that this reactor will be an addition to an existing plant with adequate space
to add the reactor. Another assumption is that the plant is located next to another plant that will
use the sodium acetate we have made.

For our laboratory, saponification of ethyl acetate was tested using 0.10 M concentrations of both
sodium hydroxide and ethyl acetate.

3
Theory – Nadezda Mamedova

The saponification of ethyl acetate with sodium hydroxide is considered a first order reaction
with respect to individual reactants and second order overall. This is a good assumption for the
limits of concentration (0.10M) and temperature (10-25°C) studied.

The reaction is

NaOH + CH3COOC2H5  CH3COONa + C2H3OH

Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) + Ethyl Acetate (EtOAc)  Sodium Acetate (NaOAc) + Ethyl Alcohol (EtOH)

The laboratory has a conductivity reader, and the results can be related to NaOH concentration
by the following equation:

[1]

Where,

= specific conductivity at time t

= specific conductivity at time t=0
= specific conductivity at time t=∞
= NaOH concentration at time t
= NaOH concentration at time t=0
= NaOH concentration at time t=∞

For the saponification reaction of interest, the concentration of sodium hydroxide should
decrease to zero as time progresses. If carried out in a batch reactor, the fractional conversion (X)
can be calculated using the following two equations:

[2]

[3]

4
The conductivity of the reaction mixture changes with conversion. Therefore, the extent of the
reaction can be monitored by recording the conductivity with respect to time. A calibration curve
is needed to relate conductivity data to concentration values.

A batch reactor is a vessel where nothing is added or removed from the vessel while the reaction
is taking place. It is commonly used in small scale production. The advantages lie in a high
conversion per volume, and flexibility of operation between products.

Continuous-stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) are common in industrial processes. For this type of
reactor, mixing is assumed to be complete. This means that the temperature and the composition
of the reaction mixture are uniform in all parts of the vessel and are the same as those in the exit
stream.

Plug flow reactors (PFRs) have one or more fluid reagents pumped through them. The chemical
reaction proceeds as the reagents travel through the PRF. Fluid in a PFR can be considered to
flow through an infinitesimally small CSTR in series with other CSTRs. Most industrial
reactions do not proceed to 100% completion in a CSTR since the rate of reaction decreases as
reactants are consumed, eventually reaching dynamic equilibrium. These reactors are commonly
used in industry for slow reactions and continuous production.

The information gathered from these reactors was used to scale up from what our laboratory had
to what was needed in an industrial setting using a scale up factor. This scale up factor was found
from the ratio of our flow in to the flow needed to be processed.

5
Design Plan - Xiaorong Zhang

The main purpose of this experiment is to select a reactor from a batch reactor, CSTR, and PFR,
for industrial use by comparing the efficiency and operational costs of each to achieve 90%
conversion of the ethyl acetate waste stream. The pilot trials are required to select a reactor on a
small scale. During the pilot trials, residence time and conductivity were determined. Residence
time is used to compare reaction rate, and conductivity is used to find the conversion of the
reaction. Both are important for comparing efficiency of the reactors. Temperature and stirring
rate also need to be determined during pilot trials to achieve our goals of comparing reactor
designs.

For economic optimization, many factors need to be considered. First, equipment cost will be
compared to add a batch reactor versus a CSTR to an existing plant. The cost of a 500-gallon
industrial use CSTR/batch reactor is $70,000 (2004).2 Second, the two parts of operating cost
will be discussed. One part is the cost of raw materials, which refers to the consumption of
sodium hydroxide ($340-380 per ton), while the other part is operating time, which refers to
utilities and labor.

Some assumptions need to be made for the scale up. The first assumption is that the temperature
and pressure that our engineers are experimenting at is comparable to what will be done in the
industrial setting. Because of this, a first order reaction that requires equimolar concentrations of
ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide can be assumed. This will lower cost of product material
while still maintain high conversion. From the pilot trial to a plant level, we assume that the scale
up ratio will be a reasonable assumption to calculate the required size and flow rate of our
required reagents.

6
Experimental Plan – Andy Schultz

There are several variables involved in the operation of the batch and CSTR for this experiment.
Important independent variables that were manipulated include the ethyl acetate flow rate,
sodium hydroxide flow rate, temperature of the process inside the reactor(s), and the agitation or
mixing (motor speed) of the process inside the reactor. The operating ranges of these variables
are shown below in Table 1. The flow rates of ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide were used to
control the rates of reaction and concentration profiles of each species’ conjugate acid/base pair.
For instance, ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide could be added simultaneously into a reactor at
the same flow rate or at different flow rates. Furthermore, one species could be added to a reactor
first, while the other is added later at a lower flow rate, thereby controlling the rate of reaction
and concentration of each species and its conjugate species.

Temperature inside the reactor was controlled by use of a propane refrigerant via a cooling
system. This variable was manipulated to determine whether an increase or decrease in
temperature from ambient conditions affects conversion and to what extent. The motor speed of
the agitator is manipulated to control the mixing of the species and thereby the rate of reaction
and conversion. A motor speed was chosen to maximize agitation (mixing) without creating
excessive turbulence.

VARIABLE OPERATING RANGE UNITS

Ethyl Acetate Flow Rate 0 – 90 mL/min

Sodium Hydroxide Flow Rate 0 – 90 mL/min

Temperature 10 – 25 °C

Agitation 0 – 300 RPM

Table 1: Operating ranges of experimental independent variables

Important dependent variables that were measured or calculated include the concentration of ethyl
acetate, the concentration of sodium hydroxide, the volume of ethyl acetate, the volume of sodium
hydroxide, and the conductivity of the ionized species (sodium acetate) throughout the process.
The volume of ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide was calculated using the flow rate of each

7
species over a set amount of time. Conductivity of sodium acetate is the paramount dependent
variable and was used to determine the final concentration of each species as well as the conversion
of the reaction.

The primary effect studied in this experiment was the conductivity of the ionized species. The
group spent available laboratory days collecting conductivity data for both a batch reactor and
continuously-stirred tank reactor at various temperature increments and a set agitation. The
experiments were started at the high end of the refrigeration operating temperature range and work
toward the low end of the range by increments of 10°C then re-evaluating at smaller temperature
increments as time permits. Conductivity data was recorded for both reactors at that chosen
temperature increment before moving to another temperature increment. In this way, sufficient
data was recorded during each lab period to evaluate and compare the performance of the reactors.
Group E followed the schedule outlined in Table 2 below.

DATE TASK

Measured conductivity data for batch and continuously-stirred reactors at

9/8/2015
T=25°C. Determined proper procedure for each process.

Measured conductivity data for batch and continuously-stirred reactors at

9/15/2015
T=25°C. Repeated for T=20°C and T=10°C

9/22/2015 Evaluated data for errors. Repeated experimental conditions as needed.

Table 2: Tasks assigned for each laboratory date.

Though the experiment calls for an evaluation of a plug flow reactor, due to limitations of the
laboratory and the absence of a reactor of this type, the above measurable values will not be
evaluated for a plug flow reactor. The design calculations for the PFR were calculated using data
gathered from the CSTR experiments.

8
Apparatus – Andy Schultz

The group evaluated the efficiency and time required to convert ethyl acetate to ethanol by use of
sodium hydroxide via a batch reactor and a continuously stirred tank (CST) reactor. Available to
the group in the laboratory were two glass reactors each having a capacity of approximately 1.50
liters. Both reactors were positioned on an operating panel. Reactor one was positioned above
and to the left of reactor two such that fluid accumulated in reactor one could freely flow from
the bottom of reactor one into reactor two by gravitational force. Multiple plastic tubes
connected the reactors allowing the direction of fluid flow into and out of each reactor to be
manipulated in various ways. Hard plastic valves and stopcocks located at tube and reactor
junctions were adjusted to control the direction of fluid flow into or out of the reactor(s). One 3.2
gallon per minute electric drive centrifugal pump was used to pump ethyl acetate and sodium
hydroxide into reactor one. Two flow meters located at the top left corner of the operating panel
were used to control the flow rate at which ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide entered reactor
one. The operator was able to choose a flow rate for each fluid in the range of 10-90 milliliters
per minute. This flow manipulation proved to be an important part in the evaluation of each
reactor design. Located between each reactor was a conductivity analyzer. The group used this
device to analyze the progress of the reaction between ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide – that
is, the higher the measured value, the more dissociated sodium ions present in the mixture, thus
the further the reaction had progressed.

Also located between the reactors was a small electric suction pump. The group used this pump
to control the direction fluid flow into either a recycle into reactor or to waste bin. Located inside
each reactor were cooling coils through which a refrigerant flowed from a cooling system located
behind the operating panel. The group used the refrigeration system to choose a temperature set
point in order to control and maintain the temperature inside each reactor. An indicator located in
the upper right corner of the operating panel was used in conjunction with a thermocouple inside
each reactor to measure and monitor temperature within a specified reactor.

Several operating variables were controlled and manipulated by the group in order to properly
evaluate the efficiency of each reactor design. Reactions in a batch reactor or CSTR were
analyzed under different specified temperature set points from 10 to 30 degrees Celsius in five
degree increments. These temperature set points were made under the assumptions that the

9
reaction between ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide proceeds as a first order reaction and the
thermodynamic principle that the rate of reaction is temperature dependent. Therefore, it was
postulated that the reaction would proceed faster at higher temperature set points. The group
chose to keep agitation rate constant throughout the experimentation process to allow
comparison between methods and temperature changes. The flow rates of the ethyl acetate and
sodium hydroxide were manipulated to create either the batch reactor process or CSTR process.

To operate the experiment as a batch reactor, a temperature set point was chosen and selected on
the cooling system. The temperature indicator on operating panel was turned on and the
appropriate channel was selected to observe the temperature in the reactor of interest. Channel
one measured temperature within reactor one while channel five measured temperature within
reactor two. Next, the conductivity meter was turned on. Then the valves and stopcocks located
between the reactors were oriented such that the ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide would flow
out of the bottom of reactor one, through the conductivity meter, and then recycle back into the
top of reactor one. In this way, no fluid would flow into reactor two. The stopcock allowing flow
out of reactor one was closed to allow accumulation inside reactor one. Next, the pumps for both
ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide were turned on. The flow meters were then opened to the
same specified flow rate (30 mL per minute) and allowed to accumulate in the reactor for a
specified amount of time (3 minutes). This time frame was determined by experimental
observation. At the specified inlet flow, it took approximately three minutes for the laboratory
reactor vessel to be filled half way. After the specified time period had passed, the agitator was
turned on to a specified rotation rate (200 rotations per minute). The group determined that this
was an appropriate agitation speed through experimental observation. At this speed, the fluid was
properly mixed without excessive turbulence occurring within the reactor. Next, the valve
preventing flow out of the reactor was opened to allow the ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide
mixture to flow out of the reactor and the suction pump was turned on. The suction pump pulled
the mixture from the bottom of reactor one, through the conductivity meter, and pumped it back
into reactor one as a recycle stream. Conductivity measurements were recorded every minute
until steady state was reached. The group determined that steady state was reached when no
more sodium ions were dissociated. This was observationally interpreted by the conductivity
measures – that is, when the measured conductivity value remains the same over a period of time
(i.e., three to five minutes), it can be assumed that all of sodium ions have dissociated and the

10
reaction has gone to completion. The group repeated this process at several temperature set
points to compare the time required for the reaction to reach steady state.

To operate the experiment as a CSTR, the procedures described above are largely applicable.
The primary difference is the initial flow to fill up reactor one consisted only of ethyl acetate.
After the specified time was reached, the stopcock below reactor one was opened and the suction
pump was turned on to allow the ethyl acetate to flow through the conductivity meter and recycle
back into reactor one. Next, the pump for sodium hydroxide was turned on and the flow meter
was opened to allow sodium hydroxide to flow into the system at a specified flow rate (10 mL
per minute). As with the batch reactor, conductivity measurements were taken every minute until
steady state was observed to be reached. The process was then repeated at several temperature
set points to compare the time required for the reaction to reach steady state. Finally, the batch,
CSTR, and PFR design setups were compared to determine which reactor design would be the
most effective for our experimental purpose.

There were many hazardous conditions presented to the group throughout the experimentation
process. Ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide are skin and eye irritants (CDC) while ethyl acetate
is hazardous in cases of ingestion or inhalation (Science Lab). Due to its quick vaporization at
ambient conditions, the liquid propane used in the cooling system can act as an asphyxiant if
inhaled (Thermoscientific). Additional safety hazards in the laboratory include broken glassware
and potential malfunctioning of the feed and suction pumps.

In order to prevent injury or exposure due to these laboratory hazards, appropriate personal
protective equipment was used throughout the experimentation process. This included wearing
long sleeve shirts and pants to prevent skin exposure to chemicals, safety glasses to protect the
eyes in cases of chemical vaporization or airborne broken glass, face masks to prevent chemical
inhalation, and gloves when handling chemicals.

11
Experimental Results – Eric Henderson

The optimum reactor type for a saponification pilot plant was determined from testing a single
batch reactor and a single CSTR. With the rate constant (k) calculated at 10OC, 20OC, and 25OC,
a direct comparison for the pilot plant scale up design could be assessed. First, the theoretical
conductivity for each reactor type was calculated using Excel’s Solver and Equation 3 (from
Theory), knowing the initial sodium acetate and sodium hydroxide conductivities (21.38 mS &
0.71 mS, respectively), and setting the percent conversion (X) equal to 0.9.4

Batch CSTR *Method 1 CSTR **Method 2

EtOAc NaOH NaOAc EtOAc NaOH NaOAc EtOAc NaOH NaOAc
Flow Rate [mL/min] 100 100 0 100 100 0 100 100 0
Time [s] 180 180 180 180 180 180
Volume [mL] 300 300 300 300 300 300
Initial Concentration [M] 0.12 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.12 0.1
Final Concentration [M] 0 0.06 0 0.06 0 0.06
Agitation [rpm] 200 200 200
Total Volume [mL] 600 600 600
Initial Conductivity (Co)[mS] 21.38 21.38 0.71
Cinfinity 4.91964 4.91964 4.91964
Conductivity @ X=0.9 6.565676 (solver) 6.565676 (solver) 4.498674 (solver)
(1-X) 0.1 0.1 0.1
Conversion (X) 0.9 0.9 0.9

Table 3. Determining the theoretical conductivity at 90% conversion of NaOH for batch and CSTR
reactors using Solver, based on given initial conductivities of NaOH and EtOAc4
*EtOAc added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL NaOH
**NaOH added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL EtOAc

When a theoretical value for the conductivities at X=90% had been found, determination of the
rate constant (k) for a single batch reactor was carried out for 10, 20, and 25OC. 150 mL of ethyl
acetate (concentration = 0.12 M) and 150 mL of NaOH (concentration = 0.10 M) were added to a
stirred batch reactor. The conductivity of the ionized species was collected every minute for at
least 30 minutes. During this time the temperature decreased by 3OC, whereas the conductivity
decreased 3.04 mS (for 25OC run). By using these values specific for each run in Equation 3 (from
Theory), the concentration and percent conversion could then be derived (See Figure 1).

A similar calculation procedure was used for the CSTR: however, two methods were used to check
for the optimal process operation. For Method 1, EtOAc was added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL
NaOH, whereas for Method 2, NaOH was added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL EtOAc.

12
 Batch @ 10OC Batch @ 25OC

CSTR *Method 1 @ 10OC CSTR *Method 1 @ 25OC

Figure 1. Comparison of 1/CNaOH vs. Time for Batch and log10 (-Reaction Rate) vs. log10
(Concentration) for CSTR at 10 and 25OC. Circled in red is the point at which 90% conversion is
reached. *EtOAc added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL NaOH

From Figure 1, the rate constant (k) for the batch reactor is the slope of the line, whereas for the
CSTR k = 10y-intercept. The rate constant for this experiment increases with an increase in
temperature, regardless of which reactor type was used. However, this shows our data had
sources of error involved in the batch trials, since the rate constant for the batch at 10OC and the
CSTR at 10OC were not the similar (see Table 2 below).

13
 For X = 90%
k [L/(mol*min)] Time [min] NaOH Used [mL] EtOAc Used [mL]
Batch 10C 1.3745 28.4 300 300
Batch 25C 2.0662 46.5 300 300
CSTR Method 1 10C 0.0253 10.2 300 306
CSTR Method 2 10C 0.0218 3.56 106.8 300
CSTR Method 1 25C 0.0666 7.45 300 223.5
CSTR Method 2 25C 0.0655 5.36 160.8 300
Table 4. Rate constants and volumes of materials used in saponification reaction for each reactor
type

The rate constant for each temperature stayed relatively similar for the CSTR, regardless of the
method used. This gives us confidence in our CSTR results. Method 2 with the CSTR (NaOH
added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL EtOAc) resulted in a much lower average reaction rate time (4.46
min as opposed to 8.83 min with Method 1) and the least amount of materials used. By adding
the more reactive EtOAc to the reaction vessel first, only a small quantity of NaOH needed to be
added for the saponification reaction to reach completion, producing NaOAc and EtOH (See
Figure 2).

CSTR *Method 2 @ 10OC CSTR *Method 2 @ 25OC

Figure 2. 1/CNaOH vs. Time for CSTR at 10 and 25OC. Circled in red is the point at which 90%
conversion is reached. The 100% Conversion Line denotes where the saponification reaction
reaches completion. The right side of this line jumps to a high 1/CNaOH value because NaOH is
being added in excess (NaOH saturation). *NaOH added at 30 mL/min to 300 mL EtOAc

14
Error Analysis
Pertaining to the linearity of the graphs up to the 90% conversion mark, the batch reactor had the
highest average R2 value of 0.9814, therefore confirming a second order reaction. The R2 values
for each method using a CSTR averaged above 0.8, which is respectable. By comparing our
experimentally found conductivity values to the theoretically calculated values in Table 3, our
percent error of each value is less than 5%, so the results from our data are statistically
significant (See Table 5).
Cond. Theory [mS] Cond. Exp. [mS] % Error
Batch 10C 6.565676 6.56 0.08644959
Batch 25C 6.565676 6.54 0.391064073
CSTR Method 1 10C 6.565676 6.57 0.065857651
CSTR Method 1 25C 6.565676 6.40 2.523365454
CSTR Method 2 10C 4.498674 4.44 1.304259585
CSTR Method 2 25C 4.498674 4.57 1.585480562
Table 5. Determination of % Error of conductivity values in relation to experimental and the
values found in Table 1

Confidence in our results is also found by comparing our experimentally found k values with the
Arrhenius values at each temperature. In Table 6 the theoretical rate constants are obtained from
using the Arrhenius equation at our temperatures, along with an average pre-exponential factor
found from a related study.3
Temp [C] Temp [K] k Theory [L/(mol*min)] k Exp. [L/(mol*min)] % Error
Batch 10 283.15 3.1062 1.3745 55.7495
Batch 25 298.15 7.5241 2.0662 72.5389
CSTR Method 1 10 283.15 3.1062 1.5204 51.0532
CSTR Method 2 10 283.15 3.1062 1.3054 57.9734
CSTR Method 1 25 298.15 7.5241 3.9962 46.8875
CSTR Method 2 25 298.15 7.5241 3.9323 47.7367
Table 6. Comparison of theoretical (Arrhenius values) and experimental rate constants at 10 and
25OC for batch and CSTR.

By analyzing Table 6 it is apparent that, in theory, k is independent of reactor type and only
depends on temperature. Upon calculation of percent error, our experimental data has
unfortunately produced statistically insignificant results. However, since we crosschecked our
CSTR data by using multiple methods, our data has produced a strong trend between each
temperature. In other words, for the CSTR each method produced a similar rate constant for the
same temperature. Due to this result, we can conclude that our experimental values are
appropriate for a scaled up pilot plant for a saponification reaction to determine the best reactor

15
type based on cost. Based on our experimental data alone, the CSTR running at 25OC appears to
be the prime candidate, due to it having a low reaction time to 90% conversion (averaging 6.41
min) and the highest experimental rate constant (averaging 3.96 L/(mol*min)) with the lowest
average error (47.3%).

PFR Comparison – Eric Henderson

When comparing a PFR to a CSTR and
a batch reactor we already know that, in
theory, a PFR should outperform both.
This is because the conversion achieved
by a single PFR is equivalent to an
infinite amount of CSTR’s in series. By
using POLYMATH we found the
necessary PFR volume to be 589 L,
which is better than that of 600 L by the
batch and CSTR. Although the PFR
needs a smaller total volume and high
conversion per unit volume9, 11.0 L is a
negligible when cost is considered. An
uneven volume of 589 L would mean a
custom designed reactor which would
add extra cost to a scale up plant.

Furthermore, plug flow reactors are used

primarily for gas phases reactions9,
while continuously stirred tank reactors Figure 3. Determining the necessary PFR volume for
can be utilized for liquid phase, gas- a 90% saponification conversion on an experimental
scale.
liquid, and solid-liquid reactions10 so
CSTRs are much more versatile than PFRs. Both reactor types can be operated continuously at
low operating (labor) costs9,10; however, PFRs have poor temperature control and are expensive to
clean9 relative to CSTRs which are more adaptable to dynamic reaction conditions, easy to clean,

16
and are simple (inexpensive) to contruct10. For these reasons, a CSTR was determined to be the
most economical reactor for this expansion project.

17
Scaled Up Design - Xiaorong Zhang
The scaled up design is based on the data and results from pilot trials. The size of reactor is
determined by an enlarged pilot trial reactor with a ratio number. The ratio number is the ratio of
the flow rate of ethyl acetate used for pilot trial to the flow rate for the specified full-scale facility.
The amount of sodium hydroxide is also scaled up with this same ratio number. A 110 liter reactor
is selected for the scaled up design, which is reasonable for industrial use. Due to the kinetics of
the reaction and comparing the results among different trials, 10 Celsius would be used for cooling
system.

Documentation of economic optimum

With this size of CSTR, we used CAPCOST to calculate the MOC which include two pumps and
one heat exchanger (cooling system). Ethyl acetate and sodium hydroxide are the raw materials.
For product, ethyl acetate and sodium acetate are regarded as the waste and ethanol is our desired
product, which is going to sell to the market. Tables 6 and 7 show that the details of COM and cost
of materials in CAPCOST.
CRM (Raw Materials Costs) $ 137,381
COM contains CRM, CUT, CWT and COL
CUT (Cost of Utilities) $ 1,429,632
which are shown on Table 6. Raw materials CWT (Waste Treatment Costs) $ 1,418,147
included ethyl acetate, which is provided, and COL (Cost of Operating Labor) $ 105,800
sodium hydroxide (more information is Table 6. Cost of manufacture
shown on Table 7). Utility costs include cooling water use and electricity use for the operating
process. Waste treatment costs refer to the waste as shown in Table 7. For cost of operating labor,
since our plant only contains one CSTR, we decided to use one operating laborer with CAPCOST
defaulted pay. COM was calculated by using:

COMd = 0.18*FCIL + 2.76*COL + 1.23*(CUT + CWT + CRM) [4]

Where FCIL is cost of equipment which is shown on Table 8

Table 7 shows the materials we used and materials on the production side. The price of each
material was found from Chemical Marketing Reporter.5 Ethanol is considered the desired product

18
to be sold to a downstream oil refinery company or directly to the market. Sodium acetate and
ethyl acetate are considered the waste products, and the cost of waste treatment is calculated by
using CAPCOST. The estimation of total capital investment (TCI) and a summary of the annual
costs are shown in Table 9 and Table 10, respectively.

Material Name Classification Price ($/kg) Flowrate (kg/h) Annual Cost

sodium hydroxide Raw Material $ 8.82 1.87 $ 137,381.35
alcohol Product $ (3.00) 1596.59 $ -39,860,416.01
sodium acetate Non-Hazardous Waste $ 0.04 2846.06 $ 852,655.61
ethylacetate Hazardous Waste $ 0.20 339.76 $ 565,491.55
sum $ -38,304,887.50
Table 7. Cost of materials

equip C (2014)
agitator $ 49,381.30
exchanger $ 65,000.84
pumps(2) $ 95,105.99
drivers(2) $ 184,061.96
reactor $ 20,805.92
storage tank $ 109,583.51
sum $ 523,939.52
Table 8 Cost of equipment

Design limitations and Assumptions

 Constant T/P
Since the pilot trial was running under the assumption of temperature and pressure were
constant, the reaction kinetics might be different if this assumption is not met which means
the inlet flow rate and conversion rate might not agree with our data.
 Sodium hydroxide reaching 100% conversion
As a limited reactant, sodium hydroxide was assumed to be consumed completely.
However, there will be excess sodium hydroxide on the production side. So, sodium
hydroxide needs to be considered as a waste unless the amount of sodium hydroxide is too
small. In our design, we recommend using sodium hydroxide in a 1:1 ratio due to reaction
stoichiometry. In the industrial setting, this would mean that if the reaction reached 90%

19
 conversion, 10% of the sodium hydroxide would not have reacted and could be recycled
back.
 First order reaction
The order of reaction is important to analyze reaction kinetics. If the order of reaction is
different, the data we got might not agree with the reaction kinetics.

Table 8 TCI of scaled up design Table 9 Summary of annual cost

Summary of annual costs along with the total product cost

Estimation of total capital investment(TCI)
component $ manufacturing cost
Direct Cost A.Direct production costs
1.raw materials
Onsite
ethyl acetate (provided) $ -
Purchased Equipment
sodium hydroxide $ 137,381.00
agitator $ 49,381.30 2.operating labor $ 105,800.00
exchanger $ 65,000.84 3.Direct supervisory and clerical $ 47,610.00
pumps(2) $ 95,105.99 4.utilities
drivers(2) $ 184,061.96 electricity $ 1,429,632.00
reactor $ 20,805.92 cooling water $ 4,000.00
storage stank $ 109,583.51 total $ 1,433,632.00
total purchased equipment $ 523,939.52 5.maitenance and repair $ 209,575.81
installation $ 26,196.98 6.operating supplies $ 178,139.44
piping $ 209,575.81 7.laboratory charges $ 63,480.00
sub-total $ 2,175,618.25
electrical $ 87,323.25
offsite
B.Fixed charges
building $ 183,378.83 1.capital costs
service facilities $ 261,969.76 A.local taxes $ -
total direct cost $ 1,292,384.15 B.insurance $ 130,984.88
indirect cost C.land owned
engineering $ 387,715.25 sub-total $ 130,984.88
construction $ 193,857.62 C.overhead costs $ 288,925.81
contractor's fee $ 64,619.21 general expenses
contingency $ 78,590.93 A.administration costs $ 317,818.39
total indirect cost $ 724,783.01 B.distribution and selling costs $ -
C.research and development $ 326,342.74
fixed capital investment $ 2,017,167.16
sub-total $ 644,161.13
working capital $ 605,150.15
total capital investment $ 2,622,317.31
total annual cost $ 2,819,779.37

total processing cost $ 0.04

20
Process flow diagram

Summary and discussion of propagation of error analysis

In conclusion, the estimated total capital investment is about 2.6MM US dollar and total annual
cost to run the plant is 23.3MM US dollar. Based on that, our processing cost is $0.36 per pound
of ethyl acetate (mass of sodium hydroxide used is negligible). Referring to Table 6, if we sell our
product which is ethanol at $3 per kg the first year profit will be about $39M. However, the profit
will not be that high since we estimated everything and errors in our pilot experiment makes this
estimate appear bigger. Nevertheless, it is evident that our scale-up design is potentially profitable
during its first year of operation. Refer to the experiment results, the error for our selected reactor
is acceptable which it is about 3%. It will not affect the scale-up design and estimation of the cost.

Recommendations

 Determination of reaction order.

 Running experiment under condition of temperature and pressure consistent with expected
operating conditions of industrial use.

21
Comparison with Design Based On Literature Values

By utilizing literature-derived equations to extrapolate data for the temperature parameters used
throughout the experimentation process, the group was able to derive literature-based data. These
data were compared to each reactor for the respective temperature set points for both the reaction
rate constant and conductivity measures. As evidenced by the low percent errors represented in
Tables 3 and 4, it can be concluded that the design values, which were derived from the group’s
experimental data, are consistent with literature values. Furthermore, since the design values are
consistent with literature values, the scaled-up design values are, by extension, reasonable and
consistent with literature values.

22
References - Nadezda Mamedova

1. "Sodium Acetate." Sodium Acetate. National Institute of Health, n.d. Web. 27 Sept.
2015.

2. "CRE -- Chapter One - Industrial Reactors." CRE -- Chapter One - Industial Reactors.
Web. 6 Sept. 2015.

3. K. Das, P. Sahoo, M. Sai Baba, N. Murali and P. Swaminathan, "Kinetic Studies on

Saponification of Ethyl Acetate Using an Innovative Conductivity Monitoring Instrument
with a Pulsating Sensor," Wiley, 2011.

4. Perry, Robert H., Don W. Green, and James O. Maloney. Perry's Chemical Engineers'
Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984. Print.

5. "Chemicals A-Z." ICIS. Chemical Marketing Reporter, 28 Aug. 2006. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

6. CDC:
"International Chemical Safety Cards (ICSC) - Sodium Hydroxide." Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, 1 July 2014. Web. 28 Sept. 2015.
<http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ipcsneng/neng0360.html>.

7. Science Lab:
"Ethyl Acetate." Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). ScienceLab.com. Web. 28 Sept.
2015. <http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9927165>.

8. Thermoscientific:
"Propane (Instrument Grade)." Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). Chevron Phillips
Chemical Company, LP. Web. 28 Sept. 2015.
<http://www.thermoscientific.com/content/dam/tfs/LPG/LED/LED
Documents/MSDS/Cold Storage/MSDS-R290-Propane-11-8-05.pdf>.

9. University of Michigan
“Plug Flow Reactors (PFRs).” University of Michigan. Web. 1 Nov. 2015.
<http://www.umich.edu/~elements/5e/asyLearn/bits/pfrfinal/index.htm>.

10. University of Michigan

“Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors.” University of Michigan. Web. 1 Nov. 2015.
<http://www.umich.edu/~elements/5e/asyLearn/bits/cstr/index.htm>.

23
 Run 1: Batch, T=10C
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
19 8.25 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 0.797673927 79.76739269
17 8.09 1 0.018543026 53.92863152 0.036456974 0.807394249 80.7394249
16 7.91 2 0.017408531 57.44309943 0.037591469 0.818329611 81.83296113
16 7.78 3 0.016589174 60.2802753 0.038410826 0.826227373 82.62273729
16 7.65 4 0.015769817 63.41227511 0.039230183 0.834125135 83.41251346
16 7.53 5 0.015013488 66.6067744 0.039986512 0.841415376 84.14153761
15 7.45 6 0.014509268 68.92146365 0.040490732 0.846275537 84.62755371
15 7.36 7 0.013942021 71.72561261 0.041057979 0.851743218 85.17432183
14 7.29 8 0.013500829 74.06952669 0.041499171 0.855995859 85.59958591
14 7.21 9 0.012996609 76.94314652 0.042003391 0.86085602 86.08560202
14 7.15 10 0.012618444 79.24907158 0.042381556 0.864501141 86.45011409
14 7.09 11 0.01224028 81.69748025 0.04275972 0.868146262 86.81462617
14 7.04 12 0.011925142 83.85644181 0.043074858 0.871183862 87.11838623
14 6.99 13 0.011610005 86.13260733 0.043389995 0.874221463 87.4221463
14 6.95 14 0.011357895 88.04448255 0.043642105 0.876651543 87.66515435
14 6.91 15 0.011105785 90.04315983 0.043894215 0.879081624 87.9081624
14 6.87 16 0.010853675 92.13468792 0.044146325 0.881511704 88.15117045
14 6.83 17 0.010601566 94.3256909 0.044398434 0.883941785 88.3941785
14 6.8 18 0.010412483 96.03857014 0.044587517 0.885764345 88.57643454
14 6.77 19 0.010223401 97.81480899 0.044776599 0.887586906 88.75869058
14 6.74 20 0.010034318 99.6579892 0.044965682 0.889409466 88.94094661
14 6.72 21 0.009908264 100.9258582 0.045091736 0.890624506 89.06245064
14 6.69 22 0.009719181 102.8893263 0.045280819 0.892447067 89.24470668
14 6.67 23 0.009593126 104.2413053 0.045406874 0.893662107 89.3662107
14 6.65 24 0.009467071 105.6292879 0.045532929 0.894877147 89.48771473
14 6.62 25 0.009277989 107.7819783 0.045722011 0.896699708 89.66997077
14 6.6 26 0.009151934 109.2665223 0.045848066 0.897914748 89.79147479
14 6.59 27 0.009088907 110.0242362 0.045911093 0.898522268 89.8522268
14 6.57 28 0.008962852 111.571634 0.046037148 0.899737308 89.97373083
14 6.56 29 0.008899824 112.3617706 0.046100176 0.900344828 90.03448284

24
 Run 1: Batch, T=20C
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
24 11 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 0.630605892 63.0605892
25 10.2 0.01 0.03184182 31.40524005 0.02315818 0.679207502 67.92075021
26 8.84 1 0.023270085 42.97362851 0.031729915 0.761830239 76.18302394
26 8.07 2 0.018416971 54.29774594 0.036583029 0.808609289 80.86092892
26 7.66 3 0.015832845 63.15984324 0.039167155 0.833517614 83.35176144
26 7.28 4 0.013437801 74.41693577 0.041562199 0.856603379 85.66033793
26 7 5 0.011673032 85.66754227 0.043326968 0.873613943 87.36139428
26 6.77 6 0.010223401 97.81480899 0.044776599 0.887586906 88.75869058
26 6.58 7 0.009025879 110.7925324 0.045974121 0.899129788 89.91297882
26 6.43 8 0.008080467 123.7552211 0.046919533 0.90824259 90.82425901
26 6.3 9 0.00726111 137.7199873 0.04773889 0.916140352 91.61403517
27 6.2 10 0.006630836 150.8105565 0.048369164 0.922215553 92.2215553
27 6.08 11 0.005874506 170.2270789 0.049125494 0.929505795 92.95057945
27 6.03 12 0.005559369 179.8765383 0.049440631 0.932543395 93.25433952
27 5.96 13 0.005118176 195.3820862 0.049881824 0.936796036 93.67960361
27 5.9 14 0.004740012 210.9699424 0.050259988 0.940441157 94.04411568
27 5.85 15 0.004424874 225.9951143 0.050575126 0.943478757 94.34787575
27 5.79 16 0.00404671 247.1143438 0.05095329 0.947123878 94.71238782
27 5.75 17 0.0037946 263.5324015 0.0512054 0.949553959 94.95539587
27 5.71 18 0.00354249 282.2873206 0.05145751 0.951984039 95.19840392
27 5.68 19 0.003353408 298.204133 0.051646592 0.9538066 95.38065996
28 5.64 20 0.003101298 322.4456616 0.051898702 0.95623668 95.62366801
28 5.62 21 0.002975243 336.1070214 0.052024757 0.95745172 95.74517204
28 5.59 22 0.00278616 358.9168769 0.05221384 0.959274281 95.92742808
28 5.57 23 0.002660106 375.9249387 0.052339894 0.960489321 96.0489321
28 5.55 24 0.002534051 394.6251135 0.052465949 0.961704361 96.17043613
28 5.53 25 0.002407996 415.2831399 0.052592004 0.962919402 96.29194015
28 5.51 26 0.002281941 438.2234743 0.052718059 0.964134442 96.41344418
28 5.49 27 0.002155886 463.8464574 0.052844114 0.965349482 96.5349482
28 5.48 28 0.002092858 477.8154221 0.052907142 0.965957002 96.59570022
28 5.46 29 0.001966803 508.4392174 0.053033197 0.967172042 96.71720424
28 5.45 30 0.001903776 525.2718876 0.053096224 0.967779563 96.77795625
28 5.44 31 0.001840749 543.2572632 0.053159251 0.968387083 96.83870827
28 5.43 32 0.001777721 562.5179486 0.053222279 0.968994603 96.89946028
28 5.42 33 0.001714694 583.1945746 0.053285306 0.969602123 96.96021229
29 5.41 34 0.001651666 605.4492378 0.053348334 0.970209643 97.0209643
29 5.4 35 0.001588639 629.4697586 0.053411361 0.970817163 97.08171632
29 5.39 36 0.001525611 655.4749954 0.053474389 0.971424683 97.14246833
29 5.38 37 0.001462584 683.7215315 0.053537416 0.972032203 97.20322034
29 5.38 38 0.001462584 683.7215315 0.053537416 0.972032203 97.20322034
29 5.37 39 0.001399556 714.5121704 0.053600444 0.972639724 97.26397236
29 5.36 40 0.001336529 748.2068331 0.053663471 0.973247244 97.32472437
29 5.36 41 0.001336529 748.2068331 0.053663471 0.973247244 97.32472437
29 5.35 42 0.001273501 785.236693 0.053726499 0.973854764 97.38547638
30 5.35 43 0.001273501 785.236693 0.053726499 0.973854764 97.38547638
30 5.34 44 0.001210474 826.1227253 0.053789526 0.974462284 97.44622839
30 5.35 45 0.001273501 785.236693 0.053726499 0.973854764 97.38547638

25
 Run 1: Batch, T=25C
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
28 9.34 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 0.731454233 73.14542331
25 9.02 1 0.02440458 40.97591589 0.03059542 0.750894877 75.08948771
25 8.69 2 0.022324673 44.79348853 0.032675327 0.770943041 77.09430413
25 8.45 3 0.020812014 48.04916938 0.034187986 0.785523524 78.55235244
25 8.25 4 0.019551465 51.14706219 0.035448535 0.797673927 79.76739269
25 8.11 5 0.018669081 53.56450167 0.036330919 0.806179209 80.61792087
25 7.98 6 0.017849724 56.02327638 0.037150276 0.81407697 81.40769704
25 7.88 7 0.017219449 58.07386747 0.037780551 0.820152172 82.01521716
25 7.79 8 0.016652202 60.05211852 0.038347798 0.825619853 82.56198528
25 7.73 9 0.016274037 61.44756793 0.038725963 0.829264974 82.92649735
25 7.67 10 0.015895872 62.90941316 0.039104128 0.832910094 83.29100943
25 7.62 11 0.015580735 64.18182443 0.039419265 0.835947695 83.59476949
25 7.58 12 0.015328625 65.23742267 0.039671375 0.838377775 83.83777755
25 7.55 13 0.015139543 66.05219281 0.039860457 0.840200336 84.02003358
25 7.52 14 0.01495046 66.88757217 0.04004954 0.842022896 84.20228962
25 7.5 15 0.014824405 67.45633074 0.040175595 0.843237936 84.32379365
25 7.47 16 0.014635323 68.32783892 0.040364677 0.845060497 84.50604969
25 7.44 17 0.014446241 69.2221609 0.040553759 0.846883057 84.68830572
25 7.41 18 0.014257158 70.14020437 0.040742842 0.848705618 84.87056176
25 7.38 19 0.014068076 71.08292582 0.040931924 0.850528178 85.0528178
25 7.35 20 0.013878994 72.05133387 0.041121006 0.852350738 85.23507384
25 7.32 21 0.013689911 73.04649284 0.041310089 0.854173299 85.41732988
25 7.29 22 0.013500829 74.06952669 0.041499171 0.855995859 85.59958591
25 7.26 23 0.013311746 75.12162325 0.041688254 0.85781842 85.78184195
25 7.23 24 0.013122664 76.2040388 0.041877336 0.85964098 85.96409799
25 7.2 25 0.012933582 77.31810307 0.042066418 0.86146354 86.14635403
25 7.17 26 0.012744499 78.46522473 0.042255501 0.863286101 86.32861007
25 7.14 27 0.012555417 79.6468973 0.042444583 0.865108661 86.5108661
25 7.11 28 0.012366335 80.86470563 0.042633665 0.866931221 86.69312214
25 7.08 29 0.012177252 82.12033301 0.042822748 0.868753782 86.87537818
25 7.05 30 0.01198817 83.41556895 0.04301183 0.870576342 87.05763422
25 7.02 31 0.011799087 84.75231764 0.043200913 0.872398903 87.23989026
25 6.99 32 0.011610005 86.13260733 0.043389995 0.874221463 87.4221463
25 6.96 33 0.011420923 87.55860059 0.043579077 0.876044023 87.60440233
25 6.93 34 0.01123184 89.03260562 0.04376816 0.877866584 87.78665837
25 6.9 35 0.011042758 90.55708868 0.043957242 0.879689144 87.96891441
25 6.87 36 0.010853675 92.13468792 0.044146325 0.881511704 88.15117045
25 6.84 37 0.010664593 93.76822857 0.044335407 0.883334265 88.33342649
25 6.81 38 0.010475511 95.46073987 0.044524489 0.885156825 88.51568252
25 6.78 39 0.010286428 97.21547374 0.044713572 0.886979386 88.69793856
25 6.75 40 0.010097346 99.03592573 0.044902654 0.888801946 88.8801946
25 6.72 41 0.009908264 100.9258582 0.045091736 0.890624506 89.06245064
25 6.69 42 0.009719181 102.8893263 0.045280819 0.892447067 89.24470668
25 6.66 43 0.009530099 104.9307069 0.045469901 0.894269627 89.42696272
25 6.63 44 0.009341016 107.0547314 0.045658984 0.896092188 89.60921875
25 6.6 45 0.009151934 109.2665223 0.045848066 0.897914748 89.79147479
25 6.57 46 0.008962852 111.571634 0.046037148 0.899737308 89.97373083
25 6.54 47 0.008773769 113.9761001 0.046226231 0.901559869 90.15598687
25 6.51 48 0.008584687 116.4864855 0.046415313 0.903382429 90.33824291
25 6.48 49 0.008395604 119.1099467 0.046604396 0.905204989 90.52049894
25 6.45 50 0.008206522 121.8542995 0.046793478 0.90702755 90.70275498
25 6.42 51 0.00801744 124.7280974 0.04698256 0.90885011 90.88501102
25 6.39 52 0.007828357 127.74072 0.047171643 0.910672671 91.06726706
25 6.36 53 0.007639275 130.9024755 0.047360725 0.912495231 91.2495231
25 6.33 54 0.007450193 134.2247188 0.047549807 0.914317791 91.43177913
25 6.3 55 0.00726111 137.7199873 0.04773889 0.916140352 91.61403517

26
 Run 1 CSTR, T_Cooler = 10 C Method 1
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
19 22.3 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 -0.080843961 -8.08439612
17 19.6 1 0.091087633 10.97843871 -0.036087633 0.087062727 8.706272745
16 17.4 2 0.077221592 12.94974598 -0.022221592 0.223875585 22.38755849
15 15.4 3 0.0646161 15.4760192 -0.0096161 0.34825091 34.82509098
15 13.7 4 0.053901431 18.55238302 0.001098569 0.453969936 45.3969936
15 12.1 5 0.043817038 22.82217272 0.011182962 0.553470196 55.34701959
15 10.7 6 0.034993193 28.57698636 0.020006807 0.640532923 64.05329234
15 9.5 7 0.027429898 36.45657052 0.027570102 0.715158118 71.51581184
15 8.29 8 0.019803575 50.49593339 0.035196425 0.79040519 79.04051899
15 7.36 9 0.013942021 71.72561261 0.041057979 0.848239716 84.8239716
15 6.57 10 0.008962852 111.571634 0.046037148 0.897367969 89.73679694
15 5.87 11 0.004550929 219.7353387 0.050449071 0.940899333 94.08993331
15 5.28 12 0.000832309 1201.476657 0.054167691 0.977590054 97.7590054

Run 2 CSTR, T_Cooler = 10 C Method 2

T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
21 0.18 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 -0.125901502 -12.59015023
20 0.37 0.5 -0.030114174 -33.20695404 0.085114174 -0.080767001 -8.076700145
19 0.89 1 -0.026836746 -37.26234134 0.081836746 0.042759001 4.275900077
18 1.77 1.5 -0.02129033 -46.96968127 0.07629033 0.251803005 25.18030045
17 2.57 2 -0.016248133 -61.54553336 0.071248133 0.441843008 44.1843008
17 3.26 2.5 -0.011899238 -84.03899478 0.066899238 0.605752511 60.57525109
16 3.87 3 -0.008054563 -124.1532304 0.063054563 0.750658014 75.06580135
16 4.44 3.5 -0.004461998 -224.1148677 0.059461998 0.886061516 88.60615159
16 4.94 4 -0.001310625 -762.9950227 0.056310625 1.004836518 100.4836518
16 5.4 4.5 0.001588639 629.4697586 0.053411361 1.11410952 111.410952
16 5.82 5 0.004235792 236.0833563 0.050764208 1.213880522 121.3880522
15 6.21 5.5 0.006693863 149.3905683 0.048306137 1.306525024 130.6525024
15 6.57 6 0.008962852 111.571634 0.046037148 1.392043025 139.2043025
15 6.9 6.5 0.011042758 90.55708868 0.043957242 1.470434526 147.0434526
15 7.21 7 0.012996609 76.94314652 0.042003391 1.544075028 154.4075028

27
Run 1 CSTR, T_Cooler = 20 C Method 1
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
24 18.52 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 0.154225403 15.42254029
23 17.62 0.5 0.078608196 12.72131978 -0.023608196 0.210194299 21.01942991
23 16.89 1 0.074007191 13.51220038 -0.019007191 0.255591293 25.55912927
22 16.03 1.5 0.06858683 14.58005864 -0.01358683 0.309072682 30.90726825
22 15.23 2 0.063544633 15.73697029 -0.008544633 0.358822812 35.88228124
22 14.46 2.5 0.058691518 17.03823699 -0.003691518 0.406707313 40.67073125
22 13.79 3 0.054468679 18.35917499 0.000531321 0.448373046 44.83730464
22 13.16 3.5 0.050497948 19.80278468 0.004502052 0.487551274 48.75512737
22 12.55 4 0.046653273 21.4347232 0.008346727 0.525485748 52.54857478
21 12 4.5 0.043186763 23.15524321 0.011813237 0.559688962 55.96889622
21 11.47 5 0.039846308 25.0964283 0.015153692 0.592648423 59.26484233
21 10.97 5.5 0.036694934 27.25171782 0.018305066 0.623742255 62.37422545
21 10.49 6 0.033669616 29.70036812 0.021330384 0.653592333 65.35923325
21 10.04 6.5 0.028186227 35.47832037 0.026813773 0.681576781 68.15767806
21 9.62 7 0.028186227 35.47832037 0.026813773 0.707695599 70.76955989
21 9.26 7.5 0.025917239 38.58435746 0.029082761 0.730083157 73.00831573
21 8.91 8 0.023711278 42.17402457 0.031288722 0.751848839 75.18488392
21 8.54 8.5 0.021379261 46.77430053 0.033620739 0.774858274 77.48582743
21 8.24 9 0.019488438 51.31247665 0.035511562 0.793514573 79.35145731
21 7.94 9.5 0.017597614 56.82588631 0.037402386 0.812170872 81.21708718
21 7.64 10 0.01570679 63.66673288 0.03929321 0.830827171 83.08271705
21 7.38 10.5 0.014068076 71.08292582 0.040931924 0.846995963 84.69959628
21 7.13 11 0.012492389 80.0487373 0.042507611 0.862542878 86.25428784
21 6.89 11.5 0.01097973 91.07691778 0.04402027 0.877467917 87.74679174
21 6.67 12 0.009593126 104.2413053 0.045406874 0.891149203 89.11492031
21 6.45 12.5 0.008206522 121.8542995 0.046793478 0.904830489 90.48304889
21 6.24 13 0.006882945 145.2866385 0.048117055 0.917889898 91.7889898
21 6.05 13.5 0.005685424 175.8883882 0.049314576 0.929705554 92.97055539
21 5.85 14 0.004424874 225.9951143 0.050575126 0.942143086 94.21430863

28
Run 2 CSTR, T_Cooler = 20 C Method 1
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
22 17.6 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 0.211438052 21.14380524
22 17.1 0.5 0.075330768 13.27478831 -0.020330768 0.242531884 24.25318836
22 16.3 1 0.070288571 14.22706398 -0.015288571 0.292282014 29.22820136
22 15.5 1.5 0.065246374 15.32652213 -0.010246374 0.342032144 34.20321436
22 14.8 2 0.060834452 16.43805387 -0.005834452 0.385563507 38.55635073
22 14.2 2.5 0.057052804 17.52762218 -0.002052804 0.422876105 42.28761048
22 13.6 3 0.053271157 18.77188447 0.001728843 0.460188702 46.01887022
21 13.1 3.5 0.050119784 19.95220103 0.004880216 0.491282533 49.12825335
21 12.6 4 0.046968411 21.29090566 0.008031589 0.522376365 52.23763647
21 12.2 4.5 0.044447312 22.4985483 0.010552688 0.54725143 54.72514297
21 11.7 5 0.041295939 24.21545607 0.013704061 0.578345261 57.83452609
21 11.3 5.5 0.038774841 25.78991898 0.016225159 0.603220326 60.32203259
21 10.9 6 0.036253742 27.58335934 0.018746258 0.628095391 62.80953909
21 10.6 6.5 0.03184182 31.40524005 0.02315818 0.64675169 64.67516896
21 10.2 7 0.03184182 31.40524005 0.02315818 0.671626755 67.16267546
21 9.9 7.5 0.029950996 33.38787114 0.025049004 0.690283053 69.02830534
21 9.6 8 0.028060172 35.63769989 0.026939828 0.708939352 70.89393521
21 9.3 8.5 0.026169348 38.2126441 0.028830652 0.727595651 72.75956508
21 9 9 0.024278525 41.18866423 0.030721475 0.74625195 74.62519496
21 8.7 9.5 0.022387701 44.66738268 0.032612299 0.764908248 76.49082483
21 8.4 10 0.020496877 48.78792025 0.034503123 0.783564547 78.35645471
21 8.1 10.5 0.018606053 53.74594986 0.036393947 0.802220846 80.22208458
21 7.9 11 0.017345504 57.65182745 0.037654496 0.814658378 81.46583783
21 7.58 11.5 0.015328625 65.23742267 0.039671375 0.83455843 83.45584303
21 7.35 12 0.013878994 72.05133387 0.041121006 0.848861593 84.88615927
21 7.19 12.5 0.012870554 77.69673197 0.042129446 0.858811619 85.88116186
21 6.93 13 0.01123184 89.03260562 0.04376816 0.874980411 87.49804109
21 6.75 13.5 0.010097346 99.03592573 0.044902654 0.88617419 88.61741901
21 6.55 14 0.008836797 113.1631783 0.046163203 0.898611723 89.86117226
21 6.37 14.5 0.007702302 129.8313087 0.047297698 0.909805502 90.98055019
21 6.19 15 0.006567808 152.2577983 0.048432192 0.920999281 92.09992811

29
Run 2 CSTR, T_Cooler = 20 C Method 2
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
22 0.12 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 -0.140154503 -14.01545025
22 0.28 0.5 -0.030681421 -32.5930141 0.085681421 -0.102146502 -10.21465018
22 0.73 1 -0.027845186 -35.91285088 0.082845186 0.004751 0.475100009
22 1.63 1.5 -0.022172714 -45.10047769 0.077172714 0.218546004 21.85460039
22 2.42 2 -0.017193545 -58.16136322 0.072193545 0.406210507 40.62105073
22 3.12 2.5 -0.012781622 -78.23732892 0.067781622 0.57249551 57.24955103
22 3.76 3 -0.008747865 -114.3136075 0.063747865 0.724527513 72.4527513
22 4.29 3.5 -0.00540741 -184.931435 0.06040741 0.850429015 85.04290153
22 4.76 4 -0.002445119 -408.9780768 0.057445119 0.962077517 96.20775173
22 5.18 4.5 0.000202035 4949.649041 0.054797965 1.061848519 106.1848519
22 5.57 5 0.002660106 375.9249387 0.052339894 1.154493021 115.4493021
22 5.96 5.5 0.005118176 195.3820862 0.049881824 1.247137522 124.7137522
21 6.26 6 0.007009 142.6736987 0.047991 1.318402524 131.8402524
22 6.57 6.5 0.008962852 111.571634 0.046037148 1.392043025 139.2043025
22 6.87 7 0.010853675 92.13468792 0.044146325 1.463308026 146.3308026

Run 1 CSTR, T_Cooler = 25 C Method 1

T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
25 21.7 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 -0.043531364 -4.353136373
25 20.4 0.5 0.09612983 10.40259821 -0.04112983 0.037312597 3.731259748
25 19.4 1 0.089827084 11.13249984 -0.034827084 0.09950026 9.950025994
25 17.4 1.5 0.077221592 12.94974598 -0.022221592 0.223875585 22.38755849
25 16.3 2 0.070288571 14.22706398 -0.015288571 0.292282014 29.22820136
25 15 2.5 0.062095001 16.10435589 -0.007095001 0.373125975 37.31259748
25 13.7 3 0.053901431 18.55238302 0.001098569 0.453969936 45.3969936
25 12.6 3.5 0.046968411 21.29090566 0.008031589 0.522376365 52.23763647
25 11.5 4 0.04003539 24.97790085 0.01496461 0.590782793 59.07827934
25 10.6 4.5 0.034362918 29.10113709 0.020637082 0.64675169 64.67516896
25 9.7 5 0.028690447 34.85480733 0.026309553 0.702720586 70.27205859
25 8.8 5.5 0.023017975 43.44430738 0.031982025 0.758689482 75.86894821
25 8.1 6 0.018606053 53.74594986 0.036393947 0.802220846 80.22208458
25 7.46 6.5 0.014572296 68.62336752 0.040427704 0.84202095 84.20209498
25 6.91 7 0.011105785 90.04315983 0.043894215 0.876224164 87.62241641
25 6.4 7.5 0.007891385 126.7204715 0.047108615 0.907939872 90.7939872
25 5.93 8 0.004929094 202.8770355 0.050070906 0.937168073 93.71680734
25 5.52 8.5 0.002344968 426.4450148 0.052655032 0.962665015 96.2665015
25 5.15 9 1.29521E-05 77207.29927 0.054987048 0.98567445 98.56744501

30
Run 2 CSTR, T_Cooler = 25 C Method 2
T [C] Conductivity [mS] time [min] Concentration 1/C Reacted X X [%]
26 0.23 0 0.055 18.18181818 0 -0.114024002 -11.40240021
26 0.55 0.5 -0.02897968 -34.50693734 0.08397968 -0.038008001 -3.800800068
26 0.9 1 -0.026773719 -37.35005985 0.081773719 0.045134501 4.513450081
26 1.25 1.5 -0.024567758 -40.70375544 0.079567758 0.128277002 12.82770023
26 1.56 2 -0.022613906 -44.22057752 0.077613906 0.201917504 20.19175036
26 2.06 2.5 -0.019462533 -51.38077265 0.074462533 0.320692506 32.06925058
26 2.72 3 -0.015302721 -65.3478559 0.070302721 0.477475509 47.74755086
26 3.26 3.5 -0.011899238 -84.03899478 0.066899238 0.605752511 60.57525109
26 3.67 4 -0.009315112 -107.3524387 0.064315112 0.703148013 70.31480127
26 4.04 4.5 -0.006983096 -143.2029568 0.061983096 0.791041514 79.10415142
26 4.31 5 -0.005281355 -189.3453628 0.060281355 0.855180015 85.51800154
25 4.57 5.5 -0.003642641 -274.5261227 0.058642641 0.916943017 91.69430165
25 4.81 6 -0.002129982 -469.4876385 0.057129982 0.973955018 97.39550175
25 5.02 6.5 -0.000806405 -1240.071906 0.055806405 1.023840518 102.3840518
25 5.24 7 0.000580199 1723.545706 0.054419801 1.076101519 107.6101519
25 5.42 7.5 0.001714694 583.1945746 0.053285306 1.11886052 111.886052
25 5.6 8 0.002849188 350.9772041 0.052150812 1.161619521 116.1619521
25 5.77 8.5 0.003920655 255.0594401 0.051079345 1.202003022 120.2003022
25 5.93 9 0.004929094 202.8770355 0.050070906 1.240011022 124.0011022
25 6.09 9.5 0.005937533 168.4201029 0.049062467 1.278019023 127.8019023
25 6.22 10 0.00675689 147.997071 0.04824311 1.308900524 130.8900524
25 6.37 10.5 0.007702302 129.8313087 0.047297698 1.344533024 134.4533024
25 6.51 11 0.008584687 116.4864855 0.046415313 1.377790025 137.7790025
25 6.64 11.5 0.009404044 106.3372329 0.045595956 1.408671525 140.8671525
25 6.77 12 0.010223401 97.81480899 0.044776599 1.439553026 143.9553026

31
Experimental Results Hand Calculations – Eric Henderson

32
33
34
35
36
Scale Up Hand Calculations - Xiaorong Zhang

37
Calculation of equipment cost:

equip s a b n C C (2014)
agitator 40 4300 1920 0.8 $ 41,023.94 $ 49,381.30
exchanger 500 10000 88 1 $ 54,000.00 $ 65,000.84
pumps(2) 250 3300 48 1.2 $ 79,010.12 $ 95,105.99
drivers(2) 1000 920 600 0.7 $ 152,911.05 $ 184,061.96
reactor 0.11 14000 15400 0.7 $ 17,284.70 $ 20,805.92
tank 100 53000 2400 0.6 $ 91,037.44 $ 109,583.51
CEPCI 478.6 $ 435,267.24 $ 523,939.52
CEPCI(2014) 576.1
Peters et al., Plant Design for Chemical Engineers(2008)
table6.6
C=a+b*s^n

COM (using CAPCOST)

Economic Options capcost

Cost of Land $ 1,250,000
Taxation Rate 42%
Annual Interest Rate 10%
Salvage Value 0
Working Capital $ 1,860,000
FCIL $ 523,940
Total Module Factor 1.18
Grass Roots Factor 0.50

Economic Information Calculated From Given Information

Revenue From Sales $ 39,860,416
CRM (Raw Materials Costs)
$ 17,929,535
CUT (Cost of Utilities) $ 1,429,632
CWT (Waste Treatment Costs)
$ 1,418,147
COL (Cost of Operating Labor)
$ 105,800

Factors Used in Calculation of Cost of Manufacturing (COMd)

Comd = 0.18*FCIL + 2.76*COL + 1.23*(CUT + CWT + CRM)
Multiplying factor for FCIL 0.18
Multiplying factor for COL 2.76
Facotrs for CUT, CWT, and CRM 1.23

COMd $ 25,942,414

38