Densities, viscosities and excess parameters of octanol with alkyl(C1 – C4) acetates at varying temperatures

Journal Pre-proof Densities, viscosities and excess parameters of octanol with alkyl(C1 – C4) acetates at varying temperatures

D. Venkatesan, D. Joshua Amarnath, T. Srinivasa Krishna, Piyashi Biswas, Ranjan Dey PII:

S0167-7322(19)33534-2

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.112221

Reference:

MOLLIQ 112221

To appear in:

Journal of Molecular Liquids

Received date:

24 June 2019

Revised date:

28 September 2019

Accepted date:

25 November 2019

Please cite this article as: D. Venkatesan, D.J. Amarnath, T.S. Krishna, et al., Densities, viscosities and excess parameters of octanol with alkyl(C1 – C4) acetates at varying temperatures, Journal of Molecular Liquids(2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.molliq.2019.112221

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2018 Published by Elsevier.

Journal Pre-proof

Densities, Viscosities and Excess Parameters of Octanol with alkyl(C1 – C4) acetates at varying temperatures Venkatesan D1, Joshua Amarnath D1, T. Srinivasa Krishna2, Piyashi Biswas3 and Ranjan Dey*3 1

Department of Chemical Engineering, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai-600119, India. 2 Department of Physics, P B Siddhartha College of Arts and Science, Vijayawada, A.P.,India. 3 Department of Chemistry, BITS Pilani KK Birla Goa Campus, Zuarinagar, Goa, India-403726.

of

* E-mail: [email protected]

ro

Abstract

The density and viscosity of binary mixtures of octanol with methyl, ethyl, propyl and butyl

-p

acetates were experimentally measured (T=298.15,303.15, 308.15and 313.15K) at 1atm over the

re

complete range of mixture composition. Based on the measurements, excess molar volume, viscosity deviation, and excess Gibbs free energy were evaluated. The calculated excess

lP

properties were then fitted to the Redlich-Kister polynomial to obtain the coefficients. All the experimental values for the pure components were comparable with the existing research values.

na

The consequences were discussed in terms of molecular interactions prevailing in the mixtures. 15 different approaches especially some recently developed ones have been employed, both

ur

predictive and correlative, for predicting viscosity values and a comparative study carried out

Jo

thereof.

Keywords: Viscosity, Density, Octanol, Excess properties. 1. Introduction

Liquid mixtures displaying uncommon behaviors have received significant attention, and their thermophysical properties are being keenly investigated. Such properties play an important role in the designing of process systems, process simulation, and molecular dynamics. Octanol is a fatty alcohol, and is manufactured for the synthesis of esters used in perfumes and flavorings [1].Moreover, the viscous liquid is used as a solvent for protective coatings, waxes, and oils. These significant applications of octanol and esters have led to the study of thermophysical properties of binary liquid mixtures [2]. Furthermore, these characteristics of octanol support the design and simulation of physical systems. In continuation of our previous research [3],Transport

Journal Pre-proof properties such as viscosity and density were measured for the binary system containing octanol and esters at 298.15,303.15, 308.15,and 313.15K. The derived thermodynamic properties such as excess molar volume, viscosity deviation, excess Gibbs free energy of activation of viscous flow and partial molar properties of the given binary mixtures at various temperatures and atmospheric pressure over the complete mixture composition range were determined by using experimental values [4]. The viscosity values of the pure components were then utilized for evaluating viscosity of the mixtures by employing predictive and correlative approaches including

Grunberg - Nissan, Hind, Tamura Kurata and Katti Chaudhri to infer the

of

characteristics of molecular interactions as well as the bonding and dispersion forces existing

ro

among the binary liquid mixtures [5].These thermodynamic transport and excess properties play an important role in the evaluation of liquid flow properties and also in heat and mass transfer

-p

applications. A comparative study has been carried out employing Average Absolute Percentage

re

Deviation (AAPD) as the criterion. 2. Materials and Methods

lP

In this present study, analytical grade chemicals procured from M/s. Lobo Chemicals were used. The purity of chemicals after purification (distillation) in terms of mass fraction was ≥

na

0.998. Using molecular sieves, the chemicals were dried and degassed [6]. The pure chemicals used in this investigation were analyzed for densities and viscosities, and all the obtained values

ur

were compared with the data in published literature. The binary liquid mixtures were well mixed for suitable volumes and prepared by mass and stored in dark colored glass vials (8 mL) with

Jo

screw caps having PFE septa, and a secure seal with parafilm to prevent absorption of moisture from the atmosphere. The mass of the liquid mixtures were measured using an electronic balance of model BL 2205 (Shimadzu Corporation, Japan) with an accuracy of 0.0001 g. The uncertainty in the mole fraction was estimated to be within 1×10−4.The values were gauged immediately after preparing the samples with different compositions [7]. To determine the density of pure and binary liquid mixtures, Rudolph Research Analytical digital densimeter (DDH-2911 Model), connected to a built in solid-state thermostat water bath (Julabo) maintained to an accuracy of ±0.02 K was employed. The uncertainty of the measured density was estimated to be ±0.001 g·cm−3.

Journal Pre-proof Ostwald viscometer

was calibrated using benzene, carbon tetrachloride, acetonitrile and

doubly distilled water. The viscometer was kept in a transparent walled bath with a thermal stability of  0.01 K for about 20 min to obtain thermal equilibrium. An electronic digital stopwatch with an uncertainty of ± 0.01s was used for flow time measurements. The values reported were the average of three consecutive measurements carried out. The uncertainty of temperature was ± 0.02 K. The combined expanded uncertainty of viscosity of pure and binary liquids was estimated as 0.17 X 103 N.S.m-2 .The relationship given below was used to obtain the viscosity:

of

η= (at-b/t) ρ

(1)

ro

Where ‘a’ and ‘b’ are the constants, ‘t’ is the flow time in seconds, and ρ is the density g/cm3.

-p

3. Results and Discussion

The density and viscosity data of the pure components have been recorded in Table 1 and a

re

comparison has been carried out with existing literature data to check the accuracy. The

lP

experimentally measured data on density ρ and viscosity ?? for the four binary mixtures of methyl acetate (MA), ethyl acetate (EA), propyl acetate (PA), and butyl acetate (BA) with octanol at 298.15, 303.15, 308.15, and 313.15 K are listed in Table 2.These values were

𝑀1 𝑥1 + 𝑀2 𝑥2 𝜌𝑚

−

𝑀1 𝑥1 𝜌1

ur

𝑉𝐸 =

na

employed to compute the excess molar volume (VE) by using the below equation:

−

𝑀2 𝑥2 𝜌2

(2)

Jo

The experimental values for viscosities as a function of mole fraction of the four studied binary systems decreased systematically from 298.15K to 313.15K through the entire range. The reliance of viscosity with temperature illustrated a linear behavior. An increase in temperature led to a reduction in the viscosity of mixtures containing esters. The measured viscosity data were analyzed in terms of the corresponding states approach and other well-known viscosity models. The deviations in viscosity (∆η) were determined according to equation (3) from the experimental data on pure and mixture components.

∆𝜂 = 𝜂𝑚 − 𝑥1 𝜂1 − 𝑥2 𝜂2

(3)

The experimental viscosity data of the aforementioned systems are as given in Table 2.

Journal Pre-proof The excess Gibbs free energy of activation of viscous flow, ∆G*E ,were determined by the following equation:

∆𝐺 ∗𝐸 = 𝑅𝑇[𝑙𝑛(𝜂𝑉 ) − ∑𝑁 𝑖=1 𝑥𝑖 𝑙𝑛(𝜂𝑖 𝑉𝑖 )]

(4)

Where M1, x1, 𝜌1 and M2, x2, 𝜌2 are the molecular weight, mole fraction, and density of the respective pure components, ρ12 is the mixture density, ??m is the mixture viscosity, η1and η2 are the viscosities of the respective pure components, R is the universal gas constant, T is the absolute temperature, Vi is the molar volume of component i, V is the mixture molar volume, xiis

of

the mole fraction of component i, and η and ηi are the mixture viscosity and the viscosity of the

ro

pure component i, respectively and presented in Table 2. The derived excess properties were given in Table 3.

-p

The mixture densities exhibit a decrease with the increase in chain length which is in

re

agreement with earlier literature[22]. This may be arising due to the decrease in the density of

lP

the ester with the increase in temperature. Presence of each additional -CH2- group around the COO- disturbs the local configuration leading to a decrease in the molecular packing resulting in

na

lower density.

ur

The excess properties at several temperatures were fitted to the Redlich–Kister model [25] . n

Y E  x1 x2  Ai (2 x1  1)i

(5)

Jo

i 0

WhereY is the excess property, x1 and x2 are the mole fractions of components 1 and 2, respectively, Ai is the fitting coefficient, and n is the degree of the polynomial equation. The fitting coefficients and standard deviations (σ) are given in Supplementary Table S1. 2

1/2

𝜎(𝑌) = (∑𝑛𝑖(𝑌𝑒𝑥𝑝 − 𝑌𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐 ) /((𝑁 − 𝑛)))

(6)

Where Yexpand Ycalcare the values of the experimental and calculated properties, respectively, and N is the number of experimental data points.

Journal Pre-proof 1.80

Methyl Acetate

1.60

1.20 1.00 0.80

of

106 VmE.(m3 mol-1)

1.40

ro

0.60

-p

0.40

0.00 0.2

0.4

lP

0.0

re

0.20

x1

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 1. Excess molar volume VmE versus Mole fraction of Octanol (1) + Methyl Acetate (2) at

Jo

ur

na

T/K = 298.15,; At T/K = 303.15,■; T/K = 308.15, ▲; T/K = 313.15, .

Journal Pre-proof 0.20

Ethyl Acetate

0.15 0.10

0.00 -0.05 -0.10

of

106 VmE.(m3 mol-1)

0.05

-0.15

ro

-0.20

-p

-0.25

-0.35 0.2

0.4

lP

0.0

re

-0.30

x1

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 2. Excess molar volume VmE versus Mole fraction of Octanol (1) + Ethyl Acetate (2) at

Jo

ur

na

T/K = 298.15,; At T/K = 303.15,■; T/K = 308.15, ▲; T/K = 313.15, .

Journal Pre-proof 0.20

Propyl Acetate

0.15

0.05 0.00 -0.05

of

106 VmE.(m3 mol-1)

0.10

ro

-0.10

-p

-0.15

-0.25 0.2

0.4

x1

0.6

0.8

1.0

lP

0.0

re

-0.20

na

Figure 3. Excess molar volume VmE versus Mole fraction of Octanol (1) + Propyl Acetate (2) at

Jo

ur

T/K = 298.15,; At T/K = 303.15,■; T/K = 308.15, ▲; T/K = 313.15, .

Journal Pre-proof 0.00

Butyl Acetate

-0.02

-0.06 -0.08 -0.10

of

106 VmE.(m3 mol-1)

-0.04

ro

-0.12

-p

-0.14

-0.18 0.2

0.4

x1

0.6

0.8

1.0

lP

0.0

re

-0.16

Figure 4. Excess molar volume VmE versus Mole fraction of Octanol (1) + Butyl Acetate (2) at

na

T/K = 298.15,; At T/K = 303.15,■; T/K = 308.15, ▲; T/K = 313.15, .

ur

The excess molar volumes of octanol and methyl acetate were seen to be positive over the entire range of concentration, with the highest values for all the temperatures at the vicinity

Jo

of equimolar concentration(Fig1). The values showed an increasing trend with the increase in the temperature. The excess molar volumes of octanol with ethyl and propyl acetates were seen to be initially positive at the lower concentration of the alkyl acetates and then moved over to negative values (Figs 2 and 3). The crossover happens at a higher concentration in case of the ethyl acetate(Table 3) as compared to that of the propyl acetate, wherein the values start falling towards negative more quickly. The positive excess values exhibit and increasing trend with increase in temperature from 298.15 to 313.15 K for both the binary systems and a reverse trend for the negative excess values with the increase in the temperature. The excess molar volume depicting a negative value is an indication of strong hetero-molecular interactions in the given liquid binary mixtures [26]. The excess molar volumes of octanol and butyl acetate mixture were negative indicating specific interactions between the molecules [27-30].The excess volume

Journal Pre-proof depicted a decrease( less negative) with increasing temperature in the following order: 298.15K<303.15K<308.15K<313.15K [7].The negative excess molar volumes can be attributed to the strong interactions between unlike molecules through hydrogen bonding [31] . Figure 5 depicts the variation in the excess molar volumes with the mole fraction of the octanol (x1) and the four alkyl acetates under consideration at 298.15 K. A good agreement is seen with the experimental and the calculated values obtained from equation 5(Table 4). 1.6

of

1.4

ro

1.2

-p re

0.8

lP

0.6 0.4

ur

0.2

na

VmE 106 m3.mol-1

1.0

Jo

0.0 -0.2 -0.4

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

x1 Figure 5. Excess molar volume, VmE vs. mole fraction, x1 of Octanol for Octanol + Methyl Acetate,□; Octanol + Ethyl Acetate,◊; Octanol + Propyl Acetate, ∆; Octanol + Butyl Acetate, ∗; binary mixtures at temperatures, T/K = 298.15. The points represent experimental values and lines represent values calculated from equation (5) using the coefficients given in table 4.

Journal Pre-proof 0.0

-1.0

-1.5

of

103 .(m-2NS)

-0.5

ro

-2.0

-3.0 0.2

0.4

0.6

x1

0.8

1.0

na

lP

0.0

re

-p

-2.5

Jo

ur

Figure 6. Deviation in viscosity,  vs. mole fraction, x1 of Octanol for Octanol + Methyl Acetate, □; Octanol + Ethyl Acetate, ◊; Octanol + Propyl Acetate, ∆; Octanol + Butyl Acetate, ∗; binary mixtures at temperatures, T/K = 298.15. The points represent experimental values and lines represent values calculated from equation (5) using the coefficients given in table 4. 3.1 Viscosity Deviation

The calculated values of viscosity deviation, ∆??, were negative and showed a decreasing trend (less negative) with an increase in temperature for all the four studied mixtures over the entire range of composition (Fig. 6) . The deviations in viscosity values for the system of octanol with varied in the order of Butyl acetate < Propyl Acetate < Ethyl Acetate < Methyl Acetate [32,33]. The negative values of viscosity deviations indicate that the dispersion forces are dominant [34,35]. The values point towards the fact that dispersion and dipolar forces exist between dissimilar molecules, which are linked to the distinction in size and shape of the

Journal Pre-proof dissimilar molecules [36-39] . It may suffice to say that deviations may be arising from Hbonding and presence of dispersion between the component molecules. 3.2

Viscosity values employing different approaches

3.2.1 Predictive approaches: Various models, including some recently developed approaches, have been tested for their predictive capabilities and a comparative study has been undertaken based on the results obtained. Fifteen approaches, 10 predictive and 5 correlatives, have been put to test for carrying

of

out the comparative study. The predictive approaches include some well-known approaches like Frenkel, Refutas, Gambill, Bingham, etc.[40] and some newly developed predictive models like

ro

the modified Frenkel [41], Dey Biswas model [42] and some more newer models [43]

-p

represented in the equations 7-10.

re

Frenkel Modified

𝜂 = exp[(𝑥1 × 𝑙𝑛(𝜂1 ) + 𝑥2 × 𝑙𝑛(𝜂2 ) + 2 × 𝑥1 × 𝑥2 × 𝑙𝑛(𝜂12 )]

(7)

lP

Where??12=(??1 x ??2) / (??1 + ??2)

na

Model 1

𝑀

𝑀

𝜂 = 𝑥11 × 𝜂1 + 𝑥22 × 𝜂2 + 𝑥1 × 𝑥2 × [(𝜂1 × (𝑀2 ) + 𝜂2 × (𝑀1 )]

(8)

2

ur Jo

Logarithmic

1

𝜂

𝜂

𝜂 = (𝑥1 × 𝑀1 + 𝑥2 × 𝑀2 ) × exp [(𝑥1 × 𝑙𝑜𝑔 (𝑀1 ) + 𝑥2 × 𝑙𝑜𝑔 (𝑀2 ))] 1

2

(9)

The recently developed Dey -Biswas[42] model is expressedas: Dey-Biswas 𝜂 = exp[𝜑1 × 𝑙𝑛(𝜂1 ) + 𝜑2 × 𝑙𝑛(𝜂2 ) + 2 × 𝜑1 × 𝜑2 × 𝑙𝑛(𝜂12 )]

(10)

Where ??12=(??1 x ??2) / (??1 + ??2) Where xi’s represent the mole fractions, Mi’s the molecular weights, ηi’s the viscosities and the φi’s the volume fractions of the pure components.

re

-p

ro

of

Journal Pre-proof

Figure 7. Average Absolute percentage deviation (AAPD) values from different predictive

lP

approaches for the four binary systems at 298.15 K.

na

Figure 7 gives a graphical representation of the Average Absolute Percentage Deviations (AAPD) values evaluated from the 10 different predictive approaches for the four binary systems

ur

at 298.15 K. A perusal of Figure 7 clearly shows that the least deviations are exhibited by the

Jo

Logarithmic model followed by the Dey Biswas model. The Modified Frenkel approach is also seen to exhibit better predictive capability than the original Frenkel relation, which is in accordance with earlier findings [41,43]. The largest deviations are shown by Hind – Ubbelohde and the Bingham approaches. It is pertinent to note that both the newly developed models, Dey Biswas and logarithmic prove their efficacy in terms of predictive for all the systems under investigation over the entire range of temperatures proving their efficacy and robustness over other approaches which are in use for several decades. A comparison of Grand AAPDs for the ten predictive systems over the entire range of temperature show a similar trend (Table S1) as shown in Fig. 7.

3.2.2 Correlative Approaches

Journal Pre-proof

The correlative approaches taken for the study include Grunberg Nissan[44], Hind, Tamura Kurata[45],Katti –Choudhari[46]and the McAllister approaches[47,48]. A look at Figure 8 clearly reveals that the McAllister approach exhibits the lowest AAPD values followed by the Grunberg Nissan at 298.15 K for all the systems under investigation at 298.15 K. This trend is observed for all the temperatures undertaken for the study. The lowest AAPD values are observed for the Octane + Butyl Acetate system for all the approaches over the entire range of temperature. The AAPDs for all the systems are found to be in the order McAllister

of


Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro

the Grand AAPDs for the five correlative approaches show the same trend as seen at 298.15 K.

Journal Pre-proof Figure 8. Average Absolute percentage deviation (AAPD) values from different correlative approaches for the four binary systems at 298.15 K.

0.35 0.30

of

0.25

ro

0.15

-p

0.10 0.05 0.00

re

10-3 G*E.(J.mol-1)

0.20

lP

-0.05 -0.10

na

-0.15 -0.20

0.2

0.4

x1

0.6

0.8

1.0

Jo

0.0

ur

-0.25

Figure 9. Excess Gibbs free energies of activation of viscous flow, G *E vs. mole fraction, x1 of Octanol for Octanol + Methyl Acetate, □; Octanol + Ethyl Acetate, ◊; Octanol + Propyl Acetate, ∆; Octanol + Butyl Acetate, ∗; binary mixtures at temperatures, T/K = 298.15. The points represent experimental values and lines represent values calculated from equation (5) using the coefficients given in table 4. Figure 9 gives the Excess Gibbs free energies of activation of viscous flow, G *E with the variation in the mole fraction, x1 ,of Octanol for all the binary alkyl acetates under consideration at 298.15 K. It is interesting to note the variation in the G *E parameters keeping in mind the variations in excess molar volume exhibited in Fig. 5 which strengthen the findings in the investigation under consideration. The G *E values provide insight into the intermolecular

Journal Pre-proof interactions and their values indicate the presence of dispersive forces as evidenced earlier in the excess volume and the viscosity deviation values[49]. E

E

A close perusal of Table 5, indicates that the values of V m,1 and V m,2 are positive and E

E

negative respectively. The V m,1 and V m,2 values are decreasing as the chain length of alkyl acetate increases. This suggests that molar volume of each component in the mixture are less E

E

than their respective the pure state of molar volume. The observed values of V m,1 and V m,2 E

of

indicate that the geometrical compressibility factor dominates in these mixtures and V m,1 and E

ro

V m,2 values decrease with increase in temperature for each binary mixtures which further

-p

supports the trends observed in VmE values.

re

4. Conclusion

lP

The mixture densities exhibited a decrease with the increase in chain length which is in agreement with earlier literature. Excess molar volumes and viscosity deviation were calculated

na

from the experimental data of density and viscosity, wherein VE were found to be both negative and positive for all the temperatures under consideration. ∆η values were seen to be negative for

ur

all the systems over the entire composition range over the entire range of temperature with the largest deviations being seen for the Octanol + methyl acetate system . Furthermore, the excess

Jo

properties were fitted in the Redlich-Kister equation, and the standard errors were estimated. The viscosity parameters predicted using Grunberg and Nissan and Hind equations were found to be comparable with the experimental values. Among the predictive approaches , both the recently developed Logarithmic model and the Dey Biswas approach showed good agreement with experimental values. Acknowledgement: Authors VD, and JAD express their sincere gratitude to the management of Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology for availing research facilities to carry out and publish this work. Declaration of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Journal Pre-proof

Nomenclature: ρ - Density (g/cm3) η - Dynamic Viscosity (mPa.s) VE - Excess molar volume (cm3/mol) ∆η - Viscosity Deviation (mPa.s)

REFERENCES

of

∆G*E- Excess Gibbs free energy of activation of viscous flow (J/mol)

ro

[1] M. Moosavi, A. Motahari, A. Vahid, V. Akbar, A. A. Rostami, A. Omrani, J. Chem. Engg.

-p

Data.61 (2016) 1981–1991.

[2] S. J. Rodriguez, D. M. Cristancho, P. C. Neita, E. F. Vargas, F. Martinez, Phy. Chem. Liq..

re

48 (2010) 638-647.

[3] D. Venkatesan, J.D. Amarnath, Rasayan J.Chem.11(2018) 834-843.

lP

[4] R. S. Pinheiro, F. M. R. Mesquita, F. X.Feitosa, H. Batista de Sant’Ana, R. S. de SantiagoAguiar, Brazilian Journalof ChemicalEngineering.35(2018) 383 - 394.

na

[5] A. Bhattacharjee,M. N. Roy,J. Chem. Engg. Data.55 (2010) 5914-5920. (2016) 976–984.

ur

[6] F. Nabi, S. Tasneem, P.Bidhuri, N. A. Malik, F.A.Itooand A. Ali, Chem. Eng. Comm.203 [7] Y. Yi, J. H. Deng, HL. Yang, X. H.Zheng, G. Q. Che,Z. Qi Huang, J. Chem. Thermodyn.

Jo

39 (2007) 438-448 .

[8] D. Venkatesan, D. Joshua Amarnath,Rasayan J.Chem,12 (2019) 589-597. [9] T.M. Aminabhavi, K. Banerjee, J. Chem. Engg. Data.43 (1998) 514-518 . [10] J. A. Al-Kandary, A. S. Al-Jimaz,M.Abdul-Haq,Abdul-Latif, Chem. Eng. Comm. 195 (2008) 1585–1613. [11] J. Shaik , M. Gowri Sankar, D .Ramachandran, C. Rambabu., J Soln. Chem. 43 (2014) 2067–2100. [12] S .Thirumaran ,K. Job Sabu,International Journal Of Recent Scientific Research. 3 (2012) 627 – 636 . [13] B. Gonzalez, N.Calvar, E. Gomez, J. Chem. Thermodyn. 39 (2007) 1578-1588. [14] Hui Lu, J.Wang , Y. Zhao, X. Xuan, K.Zhuo, J. Chem. Engg. Data.46 (2001) 631–634.

Journal Pre-proof [15] M. I Aralaguppi, C. V.J adar,T. M. Aminabhavi, J. Chem. Engg. Data.44 (1999)441-445. [16] L .Guganathan, S. Kumar, International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology.5 (2017) 1396-1403 . [17] J. G. Baragi, M. I. Aralaguppi, T. M. Aminabhavi, M. Y. Kariduraganavar, S. S. Kulkarni, J. Chem. Engg. Data.50 (2005) 917-923. [18] S. Oswal,M. V. Rathnam, Can.J. Chem.62 (1984) 2851-2853 . [19] G.S. Reddy., A. SubbaReddy, M. VenkataSubbaiah, A . Krishnaiah, J Soln. Chem. 39 (2010),399–408.

of

[20] N. N. Wankhede., . D. S. Wankhede, .M.K. Lande, B. R. Arbad,J. Chem. Thermodyn. 38 (2006) 1664-1668 .

ro

[21] M. K. Patwari, R. K. Bachu, S. Boodida, S. Nallani, J. Chem. Engg. Data.54 (2009) 1069– 1072.

-p

[22] R. L. Gardas, I. Johnson, D. M. D. Vaz, I. M. A. Fonseca, Abel G. M. FerreiraJ. Chem.

re

Engg. Data.52 (2007) 737-751.

[23] K. Saravanakumar, T.R. Kubendran., Science and Technology , 2 (2012) 50-54..

lP

[24] T.M Aminabhavi, H.T.S Phayde, R.S Khinnavar, G.Bindu,J. Chem. Eng. Data.38 (1993) 542-545.

na

[25] O. Redlich , A. T.Kister., Industrial and Engineering Chemistry,40 (1948)345-348. [26] L. Guganathan, S. Kumar, International Journal for Research in Applied Science &

ur

Engineering Technology.5 (2017) 1396-1403. [27] Wen-Lu Weng ,J. Chem. Eng. Data.45 (2000)606-609.

Jo

[28] A. R. Mahajan , S. R. Mirgane,J Solution Chem. 42 (2013) 1146–1168. [29] C.Franjo, E. Jimenez, T. P. Iglesias, J. L. Legido, M. I. Paz Andrade, J. Chem. Eng. Data. 40 (1995) 68-70 .

[30] P. S. Nikam,T. R. Mahale, Mehdi Hasan,J. Chem. Eng. Data.41(1996)1055-1058. [31] N.Segatin, C.Klofutar,MonatsheftefuÈ r Chemie.132(2001) 1451-1462. [32] I. Johnson, H.F. Costa, A.G.M. Ferreira,I. M. A. Fonseca ,Int. J.Thermophys. 29 (2008) 619–633 . [33] M .Iglesias, B. Orge, J.M . Canosa, A. Rodriguez, M Dominguez., M.M. Pineiro, J. Tojo, Fluid Phase Equilib. 147(1998) 285-300. [34] Shu-Lien, Chein-Hsiun Tu, J. Chem. Eng. Data.44 (1999) 108-111. [35] S. L. Oswal, I.N. Patel, P.S. Modi., S. A.Barad, Int J Thermophys.21(2000) 681-694 . [36] N. G.Tsierkezos , I. E. Molinou, Physics and Chemistry of Liquids.47 (2009) 172-187.

Journal Pre-proof [37] A. Rodriguez, J. Canosa, Beatriz Orge, M.Iglesias, J.Tojo,J. Chem. Eng. Data.41(1996) 1446-1449 . [38] N. G.Tsierkezos, A.E.Kelarakis,M. M. Palaiologou,J. Chem. Eng. 45 (2000) 395-398. [39] S. Gautam, Reena, M. Gautam, International Journal Of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences. 2 (2012) 56-60. [40] R. Dey, A. Harshvardhana , S. Verma,J.Mol. Liq.211 (2015) 686–694. [41] R. Dey, A.Saini , H. Hingorani, RSC Adv.6 (2016) 43838-43843. [42] R. Dey , P. Biswas, J.Mol.Liq. 265 (2018) 356-360.

of

[43] A. Saini, S.Verma, A. Harshavardhan R. Dey, RSC Adv.6 (2016) 113657- 113662. [44] L. Grunberg, A. H Nissan, Nature 164 (1949) 799–800.

ro

[45] M. Tamura, M. Kurata, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 25 (1952)32–37.

[46] P. K. Katti, M.H. Chaudhri, J. Chem. Eng. Data 9 (1964) 442–443.

-p

[47] R.A. McAllister, AIChE Journal 6 (1960) 427-431.

re

[48] M. Swetha Sandhya, Piyashi Biswas, N.R. Vinay, K. Sivakumar, Ranjan Dey, J Mol. Liq., 278(2019) 219 – 225.

Jo

ur

na

lP

[49] A. Saini, H. Joshi, K. Kukreja, Ranjan Dey, J. Mol. Liq., 223(2016),165-173.

Journal Pre-proof

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro

of

Table1. Density and viscosity of pure component and their comparison with the Literature Data at 298.15, 303.15, 308.15 and 313.15 K. Density ρ Viscosity η 3 T/K (kg/m ) (mPa.s) Component Exp Lit Exp Lit 0.8215 [9] 7.67 [1] 298.15 821.5 7.537 0.8217 [1] 7.661 [10] 0.81823 [10] 303.15 818.1 6.405 6.2611 [12] 0.81835 [11] Octanol 0.8147[11] 5.251 [5] 308.15 814.8 5.422 0.81435 [12] 5.2680 [12] 0.81153 [12] 4.61 [1] 313.15 811.5 4.625 0.8106 [1] 4.628 [10] 0.9282 [9] 298.15 928.1 0.384 0.367 [13] 0.92848 [14] 0.9218 [9] 303.15 921.4 0.365 0.348 [13] 0.9218 [15] Methyl Acetate 0.9152[9] 0.355 [9] 308.15 914.7 0.349 0.9150 [16] 0.3551 [16] 313.15 908.0 0.331 0.8948 [15] 298.15 895.4 0.420 0.426 [14] 0.8942 [17] 0.8885 [18] 0.4036 [19] 303.15 889.1 0.401 0.8886[9] 0.403 [18] Ethyl Acetate 0.8816 [17] 0.387 [15] 308.15 882.8 0.381 0.8812 [20] 0.387 [20] 0.8758 [21] 313.15 876.4 0.362 0.3426 [21] 0.8752 [22] 0.8824[9] 298.15 882.5 0.562 0.551 [15] 0.88264 [7] 0.8777 [21] 303.15 877.0 0.525 0.4878 [21] 0.8769 [7] Propyl Acetate 0.8713 [7] 308.15 871.5 0.488 0.4595 [21] 0.8718 [15] 0.8667 [21] 0.4329 [21] 313.15 866.0 0.451 0.8669 [23] 0.4327 [23] 0.8756 [21] 0.679 [24] 298.15 875.5 0.678 0.8759[24] 0.675 [9] 0.8705 [24] 0.634 [24] 303.15 870.3 0.635 0.8704[9] 0.631 [9] Butyl Acetate 0.8654[9] 0.594 [24] 308.15 865.1 0.594 0.8655 [15] 0.593 [9] 313.15 860.0 0.556 -

Journal Pre-proof Standard uncertainties, u, are u (T) = ±0.02 K;Combined expanded uncertainties Uc() = ±0.8kg∙m−3, Uc(η) <1.103N.S.m-2.=±0.10.103N.S.m-2Uc(η) (1–10.103N.S.m-2)=±0.17. 103N.S.mDensity (ρ)kg.m-3

Viscosity (η)103N.S.m-2

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro

of

x1

2

(Uc=kuc where k=1) Table 2.Density (ρ)and viscosity (η) as a function of composition octanol at T = (298.15, 303.15, 308.15 and 313.15) K.

Journal Pre-proof 298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

928.1

921.4

914.7

908.0

0.384

0.365

0.349

0.331

0.0530

919.4

912.7

905.9

899.1

0.436

0.414

0.395

0.374

0.1119

909.8

903.2

896.5

889.8

0.505

0.478

0.454

0.429

0.1776

899.5

893.0

886.6

880.3

0.601

0.564

0.532

0.500

0.2515

888.6

882.5

876.5

870.6

0.736

0.685

0.640

0.596

0.3351

877.5

871.9

866.2

860.7

0.932

0.860

0.795

0.734

0.4305

866.5

861.3

856.0

850.8

1.232

1.126

1.029

0.941

0.5404

855.6

850.7

845.8

841.0

1.722

1.554

1.402

1.267

0.6684

844.9

840.4

835.8

831.3

2.573

2.288

2.030

1.808

0.8194

833.6

829.7

825.7

821.7

4.177

3.646

3.174

2.773

1.0000

821.5

818.1

814.8

811.5

7.537

6.405

5.422

4.625

876.4

0.420

0.401

0.381

0.362

-p

re

lP

na

Octanol +Ethyl acetate 0.0000

895.4

889.1

0.0646

887.7

881.6

875.6

869.5

0.512

0.484

0.455

0.429

0.1344

880.0

874.2

868.5

862.7

0.629

0.589

0.550

0.513

0.2103

872.4

866.9

861.5

856.0

0.783

0.727

0.673

0.623

0.2928

864.9

859.8

854.6

849.5

0.991

0.911

0.834

0.766

0.3832

857.7

852.8

848.0

843.1

1.279

1.164

1.054

0.958

0.4823

851.0

846.3

841.6

836.9

1.689

1.519

1.360

1.223

0.5917

844.4

839.9

835.3

830.8

2.298

2.041

1.806

1.605

0.7130

837.7

833.4

829.0

824.7

3.246

2.844

2.482

2.179

0.8483

830.3

826.3

822.4

818.4

4.801

4.144

3.563

3.083

Jo

ur

882.8

ro

.0000

of

Octanol +Methyl acetate

Journal Pre-proof 1.0000

821.5

818.1

814.8

811.5

7.537

6.405

5.422

4.625

882.5

877.0

871.5

866.0

0.562

0.525

0.488

0.451

0.0750

876.4

871.0

865.5

860.0

0.692

0.638

0.584

0.533

0.1542

870.5

865.1

859.7

854.3

0.851

0.776

0.705

0.638

0.2382

864.6

859.3

854.0

848.8

1.053

0.955

0.862

0.774

0.3272

858.7

853.6

848.6

843.5

1.316

1.185

1.061

0.950

0.4218

852.8

848.0

843.2

838.4

1.666

1.488

1.323

1.177

0.5225

846.9

842.4

837.9

833.4

2.143

1.897

1.671

1.475

0.6299

840.9

836.7

832.6

828.4

2.823

2.470

2.154

1.885

0.7448

834.8

830.9

827.1

823.3

3.811

3.302

2.848

2.468

0.8678

828.3

824.8

821.3

817.7

5.280

4.526

3.868

3.326

1.0000

821.5

818.1

814.8

7.537

6.405

5.422

4.625

lP

re

-p

ro

0.0000

of

Octanol +Propyl acetate

ur

na

811.5

Jo

Density (ρ)g.cm-3

x1

298.15

303.15

Viscosity (η)103N.S.m-2

308.15

313.15

298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

Octanol +Butyl acetate 0.0000

875.5

870.3

865.1

860.0

0.678

0.635

0.594

0.556

0.0750

870.4

865.4

860.3

855.3

0.884

0.813

0.748

0.689

0.1542

865.3

860.4

855.5

850.6

1.130

1.030

0.938

0.855

0.2382

860.1

855.4

850.6

845.9

1.433

1.298

1.171

1.059

0.3272

854.9

850.3

845.7

841.1

1.808

1.623

1.453

1.305

Journal Pre-proof 0.4218

849.5

845.1

840.7

836.2

2.270

2.017

1.789

1.591

0.5225

844.1

839.9

835.6

831.3

2.845

2.505

2.197

1.938

0.6299

838.6

834.5

830.5

826.4

3.578

3.119

2.710

2.372

0.7448

833.0

829.2

825.3

821.5

4.535

3.918

3.378

2.932

0.8678

827.4

823.8

820.2

816.5

5.810

4.980

4.252

3.660

1.0000

821.6

818.3

814.9

811.6

7.537

6.405

5.422

4.625

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro

of

Standard uncertainty u(x) =1x10-4, Combined expanded uncertainties Uc() = ±0.8kg∙m−3, Uc(η) <1.103N.S.m-2.=±0.10.103N.S.m-2Uc(η) (1–10.103N.S.m-2)=±0.17. 103N.S.m-2(Uc=kuc where k=1)

Journal Pre-proof

 103N.S.m-2

VmE 106m3.mol-1

10-3∙ G *E J.mol-1

x1 298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

f o

Octanol + Methyl acetate

o r p

298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

0.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.0530

0.224

0.261

0.314

0.372

-0.328

-0.271

-0.223

-0.184

-0.071

-0.056

-0.043

-0.033

0.1119

0.511

0.573

0.657

0.736

-0.679

-0.563

-0.462

-0.382

-0.130

-0.110

-0.091

-0.072

0.1776

0.835

0.925

1.002

1.077

-1.054

-0.718

-0.594

-0.175

-0.158

-0.137

-0.114

0.2515

1.145

1.237

1.311

1.374

-1.447

-1.199

-0.985

-0.815

-0.209

-0.193

-0.174

-0.156

0.3351

1.404

1.472

1.541

1.596

-1.849

-1.529

-1.254

-1.036

-0.234

-0.217

-0.200

-0.182

0.4305

1.517

1.581

1.646

1.704

-2.231

-1.839

-1.504

-1.239

-0.243

-0.224

-0.208

-0.188

0.5404

1.450

1.522

1.588

1.644

-2.527

-2.075

-1.688

-1.384

-0.226

-0.207

-0.190

-0.170

0.6684

1.138

1.212

1.290

1.355

-2.592

-2.114

-1.710

-1.393

-0.183

-0.165

-0.149

-0.131

0.8194

0.664

0.706

0.749

0.793

-2.068

-1.668

-1.332

-1.077

-0.110

-0.095

-0.080

-0.069

1.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

l a

n r u

Jo

r P

e

-0.874

Octanol +Ethyl acetate 0.0000

0.000

0.000

Journal Pre-proof 0.0646

0.034

0.041

0.048

0.056

-0.368

-0.305

-0.252

-0.209

0.047

0.042

0.036

0.032

0.1344

0.070

0.081

0.092

0.105

-0.748

-0.619

-0.509

-0.422

0.076

0.070

0.064

0.058

0.2103

0.105

0.117

0.128

0.140

-1.134

-0.936

-0.768

-0.636

0.092

0.086

0.080

0.073

0.2928

0.120

0.134

0.145

0.156

-1.513

-1.248

-1.023

-0.844

0.096

0.088

0.082

0.075

0.3832

0.097

0.113

0.130

0.147

-1.868

-1.538

-1.259

-1.038

0.088

0.080

0.071

0.063

0.4823

0.001

0.037

0.073

0.109

-2.164

-1.778

-1.452

-1.195

0.068

0.059

0.051

0.044

0.5917

-0.125

-0.069

-0.012

0.045

-2.333

-1.913

-1.558

-1.279

0.041

0.034

0.027

0.020

0.7130

-0.244

-0.173

-0.101

-0.028

-2.249

-1.838

-1.493

-1.223

0.015

0.009

0.003

-0.003

0.8483

-0.262

-0.197

-0.132

-0.065

-1.656

-1.094

-0.895

-0.004

-0.009

-0.013

-0.018

1.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

n r u

l a

0.000

o r p

e

r P -1.350

f o

Table 3. Excess molar volume (VE), Deviation in viscosity (∆η) and excess Gibbs free energy of activation of viscous flow(∆G*E)as a function of composition at T = (298.15, 303.15, 308.15 and 313.15) K.

Jo

Journal Pre-proof  103N.S.m-2

VmE 106m3.mol-1

G *E J.mol-1

x1 298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

298.15

303.15

308.15

313.15

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.116

0.101

0.079

0.061

0.195

0.170

0.146

0.123

-0.555

0.246

0.227

0.206

0.179

-0.872

-0.724

0.277

0.260

0.239

0.221

-1.056

-0.874

0.285

0.269

0.251

0.236

-1.464

-1.197

-0.989

0.272

0.256

0.239

0.224

-1.866

-1.534

-1.254

-1.036

0.247

0.227

0.209

0.194

-1.416

-1.158

-0.959

0.200

0.183

0.165

0.149

-1.199

-0.987

-0.806

-0.666

0.120

0.107

0.097

0.087

Octanol +Propyl acetate 0.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.0750

-0.001

0.027

0.052

0.081

-0.321

-0.267

-0.223

-0.188

0.1542

-0.021

0.030

0.076

0.127

-0.649

-0.540

-0.446

-0.374

0.2382

-0.049

0.017

0.076

0.140

-0.976

-0.807

-0.664

0.3272

-0.084

-0.013

0.051

0.120

-1.288

-1.062

0.4218

-0.124

-0.056

0.004

0.068

-1.569

-1.290

0.5225

-0.162

-0.106

-0.058

-0.007

-1.783

0.6299

-0.190

-0.153

-0.122

-0.090

0.7448

-0.192

-0.175

-0.163

0.8678

-0.140

-0.139

-0.141

1.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

Jo

-1.724

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

-0.151 -0.144

a n

r u

-p

re

P l

ro

f o

Octanol +Butyl acetate 0.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

Journal Pre-proof 0.0850

-0.055

-0.046

-0.036

-0.026

-0.377

-0.312

-0.257

-0.213

0.153

0.130

0.110

0.092

0.1729

-0.099

-0.083

-0.065

-0.045

-0.734

-0.603

-0.491

-0.405

0.238

0.217

0.196

0.172

0.2638

-0.132

-0.110

-0.085

-0.058

-1.054

-0.859

-0.697

-0.570

0.286

0.271

0.250

0.229

0.3579

-0.154

-0.127

-0.097

-0.065

-1.325

-1.077

-0.869

-0.707

0.301

0.287

0.271

0.255

0.4554

-0.163

-0.133

-0.100

-0.065

-1.532

-1.246

-1.004

-0.818

0.284

0.268

0.253

0.234

0.5564

-0.158

-0.129

-0.095

-0.060

-1.649

-1.340

-1.083

0.225

0.207

0.190

0.6611

-0.141

-0.113

-0.082

-0.050

-1.634

-1.331

-1.076

0.183

0.167

0.150

0.138

-0.109

-0.086

-0.062

-0.036

-1.423

-1.159

-0.933

-0.756

0.120

0.108

0.098

0.089

0.8827

-0.062

-0.049

-0.034

-0.018

-0.922

-0.748

e

-0.874

0.7698

o r p

0.240

-0.604

-0.488

0.058

0.052

0.045

0.041

1.0000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

Jo

n r u

l a

r P

-0.882

f o

Journal Pre-proof Table4.Coefficients Ai of equation (5) along with standard deviations σ of binary mixture properties. T/K A1 A2 A3 σ Methyl Acetate + Octanol

VmE (106m3∙mol-1) -1.218 -1.360 -1.475 -1.573

-2.583 -2.137 -1.575 -0.942

0.030 0.024 0.012 0.000

-9.767 -8.032 -6.550 -5.380

-5.209 -4.086 -3.166 -2.485

-1.965 -1.419 -0.985 -0.703

0.008 0.005 0.003 0.003

-0.114 0.024 0.188 0.291

0.003 0.001 0.002 0.005

-2.019 -1.696 -1.364 -1.029

-1.398 -1.087 -0.780 -0.444

0.010 0.007 0.005 0.002

-8.819 -7.244 -5.912 -4.862

-4.455 -3.578 -2.853 -2.300

-1.733 -1.379 -1.095 -0.889

0.009 0.007 0.006 0.005

0.254 0.223 0.193 0.165

-0.472 -0.464 -0.454 -0.446

0.100 0.076 0.053 0.021

0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001

VmE 106m3∙mol-1

ro

-p

ur

na

-0.051 0.098 0.249 0.398

Jo

298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15  (103N.m-2.S) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15 *E G (10-3 J.mol-1) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15

0.351 0.340 0.317 0.282 Ethyl Acetate + Octanol

re

-0.931 -0.864 -0.805 -0.732

of

6.031 6.302 6.551 6.750

lP

298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15  (103N.m-2.S) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15 *E G (10-3J.mol-1) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15

Journal Pre-proof T/K

A1

A2 Propyl Acetate + Octanol

A3

σ

VmE (106m3∙mol-1) -1.218 -1.360 -1.475 -1.573

-2.583 -2.137 -1.575 -0.942

0.030 0.024 0.012 0.000

-9.767 -8.032 -6.550 -5.380

-5.209 -4.086 -3.166 -2.485

-1.965 -1.419 -0.985 -0.703

0.008 0.005 0.003 0.003

-0.114 0.024 0.188 0.291 A3

0.003 0.001 0.002 0.005 σ

-1.218 -1.360 -1.475 -1.573

-2.583 -2.137 -1.575 -0.942

0.030 0.024 0.012 0.000

-9.767 -8.032 -6.550 -5.380

-5.209 -4.086 -3.166 -2.485

-1.965 -1.419 -0.985 -0.703

0.008 0.005 0.003 0.003

-0.931 -0.864 -0.805 -0.732

0.351 0.340 0.317 0.282

-0.114 0.024 0.188 0.291

0.003 0.001 0.002 0.005

ro

0.351 0.340 0.317 0.282 A2 Butyl Acetate + Octanol

-p

-0.931 -0.864 -0.805 -0.732 A1

Jo

ur

na

6.031 6.302 6.551 6.750

lP

VmE (106m3∙mol-1) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15  (103N.m-2.S) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15 *E G (10-3 J.mol-1) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15

of

6.031 6.302 6.551 6.750

re

298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15  (103N.m-2.S) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15 *E G (10-3 J.mol-1) 298.15 303.15 308.15 313.15 T/K

Journal Pre-proof Table 5. The values Vm0,1 ,Vm,1 ,Vm0,1E ,Vm0,2 ,Vm,2 ,Vm0,2E of for the components for alkyl acetates with Octanol at temperatures T = 298.15–313.15 K. 106 Vm0,1m3  mol 1 10 6 Vm,1 106 Vm0,1E 106 Vm0,2 106 Vm,2 106 Vm0,2E T/K Octanol +Methyl Acetate 158.54

4.67

127.39

125.16

2.23

303.15

164.70

159.18

5.52

128.88

126.07

2.81

308.15

166.28

159.83

6.45

130.50

127.00

3.50

313.15

167.86

160.48

7.38

132.17

4.24

158.53

0.57

-3.47

127.93

94.94

98.41

303.15

159.89

159.18

0.71

96.42

99.10

-2.68

308.15

160.66

159.83

0.83

97.92

99.81

-1.90

313.15

161.47

160.48

100.53

-1.08

313.15

162.02

Octanol +Butyl Acetate 298.15 157.78

re

160.87

0.09

114.36

115.72

-1.36

159.18

0.59

115.05

116.45

-1.40

159.83

1.04

115.73

117.19

-1.46

160.48

1.54

116.40

117.94

-1.54

158.50

-0.72

132.10

132.69

-0.58

ur

308.15

Jo

159.77

158.53

na

Octanol +Propyl Acetate 298.15 158.63 303.15

99.46

0.98

lP

Octanol +Ethyl Acetate 298.15 159.10

-p

of

163.20

ro

298.15

303.15

158.55

159.15

-0.61

133.02

133.47

-0.45

308.15

159.32

159.80

-0.48

133.96

134.27

-0.31

313.15

160.12

160.47

-0.35

134.92

135.08

-0.16

Journal Pre-proof Highlights

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro

of

Densities and viscosities of octanol +alkyl acetates at 4 temperatures measured. Excess properties and viscosity deviations also determined. 15 predictive and correlative models used for comparative viscosity study. AAPDs used to analyze the merits of various approaches. Molecular interactions studied based on aforementioned parameters.

Jo

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.