Intermolecular Interaction of Methyl Formate with 1-butanol,  1-Pentanol and 1-Hexanol at 303K

Sampandam Elangovan* and Dereje Wakgari Amente

Department of Physics, Wollega University, Nekemte-395, Ethiopia

 

Corresponding author Email: elangovan.physics@rediffmail.com

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.13005/msri/140220

ABSTRACT:

Intermolecular interaction among methyl formate with selected primary alcohols studied using Time Domain reflectometry at 303K. Dielectric constants, dielectric loss, were determined. The parameters changed with concentration and chain length of alcohols in methylformate system. Strength of intermolecular interaction of alcohols with methyl formate determined as 1-butanol<1-pentanol<1-hexanol

KEYWORDS: Methyl formate; alcohols and dielectric relaxation

Copy the following to cite this article: Elangovan S, Amente D. W. Intermolecular Interaction of Methyl Formate with 1-butanol, 1-Pentanol and 1-Hexanol at 303K. Mat.Sci.Res.India;14(2)

Copy the following to cite this URL: Elangovan S, Amente D. W. Intermolecular Interaction of Methyl Formate with 1-butanol, 1-Pentanol and 1-Hexanol at 303K. Mat.Sci.Res.India;14(2). Available from: http://www.materialsciencejournal.org/?p=6624

Introduction

Intermolecular interaction among the liquid mixtures takes place a vital role in chemical industries and reseaech field.^1-3 The dielectric relaxation studies take a vital role to elucidate the nature of interactions in a liquid system with polar and non polar molecules.^4,5 Methyl formate is used in various chemical and pharmaceutical industries.

Alcohols are highly polar and self associated through hydrogen bonding. The carbonyl group (C=O) exist in the methyl formate tends to form hydrogen bonding with hydroxyl (OH^–) group of selected alcohols. The present work is an attempt to elucidate the molecular interactions between of methyl formate with1-butanol, 1-pentanol and1-hexanol using time domain reflectometry technique at 303K.

Materials and Methods

Methylformate and alcohols of AR grade were obtained from E-Merck India and used with out further purification. The purity of liquids analysed with the standard physical quality values. Dielectric constant (ε^’ ) and dielectric loss (ε^’’ ) were obtained using oscillator of frequency 9.36 GHz at 303K. Abbe’s refractometer was used to determine refractive indices (µ) of the binary liquid system. Viscosities of the liquid mixture were measured by Ostwald’s viscometer. Densities were measured by using 5cc specific gravity bottle.

Methods

Higasi’s Method

Dielectric relaxation time (τ) was determined using Higasi’s method ⁶.Considering  є₀ є,^’є^’’ , є _∞linearly changewith concentration of solute. The slopes a_0,a^’,a^’’and a_∞ were determined by the experimental results. Here

Mean relaxation time(τ₀), dielectric relaxation ΔF _τ and viscous flow were determined by  Eyring’s equation ⁷

Cole-Cole Method:

Determined values of  ε_0, ε,^’ ε^’’ and ε_∞ are fitted in a graph. Diameter angle with respect to centre from  ε_∞ point and abscissaaxis is equal to πα/2. Relaxation time τ was determined by

(ωτ)^1-α =  V/U                                                                                                                          —–(5)

Result and Discussion

Dielectric parameters of the liquid mixtures have been determined as shown in the Table-1. The relaxation time varies with nature of bonding present in the  liquid system.

In this study, relaxation time (τ) changed with concentration and carbon chain length of alcohols. It shows that formation of hydrogen bond in carbonylgroup of methyl formate and hydroxyl group of the alcohols. More over the ε₀ value changed with concentration of the alcohols. It reveals that decrease in the molar volume of the rotated molecules reduces the number of dipoles in the liquid mixture. It signifies that molar free energy of activation for viscous flow (ΔF_η) is greater than dielectric relaxation (ΔF_τ). It may elucidates that viscous flow involved in rotational and translation vibration of molecules.^8-10 Hence strength of molecular interaction changed with proton donating ability of alcohols which was in the order of l-Butanol<1-Pentanol<1-Hexanol.

Table 1: Dielectric constant (ε_0), relaxation time (τ) of methylformate with alcohols at 303K

Volume % of alcohols	ε0	ε’	ε’’	ε ∞	Relaxation Time  τ (ps)				Activation energy
					Higasi’s			Cole-Cole	ΔF τ kJ/mol	ΔF η kJ/mol
					τ (1)	τ (2)	τ (0)	τ
System : Methylformate + 1-Butanol
0 25 50 75 100	3.3800 3.2946 3.2204 3.1217 3.0594	2.7382 2.7627 2.7669 2.7515 2.734	0.9513	2.3334	9.957	12.834	11.28	4.5509	7.213	3.3800
			0.966	2.3306	10.37	13.212	11.714	4.9086	7.514	3.2946
			0.9863	2.3453	11.637	13.73	12.645	6.9302	7.871	3.2204
			0.9765	2.3376	10.132	13.786	11.833	7.6757	7.577	3.1217
			0.9688	2.3264	9.845	12.708	11.196	8.0992	7.143	3.0594
System : Methylformate + 1-Pentanol
0	3.2582	2.6675	1.624	2.9277	11.875	17.111	14.297	16.1191	7.465	3.2582
25	3.1609	2.6661	0.9114	2.8304	10.594	13.94	12.162	11.4032	7.297	3.1609
50	3.1595	2.6654	0.9121	2.8304	10.307	15.256	12.561	16.8527	5.974	3.1595
75	3.0846	2.6514	0.903	2.7548	9.88	11.777	10.79	10.8985	6.835	3.0846
100	3.0832	2.6577	0.9044	2.7527	9.866	12.519	11.119	17.6591	7.045	3.0832
System : Methylformate + 1-Hexanol
0	3.2428	2.6892	0.931	2.3488	12.932	20.107	16.152	18.9415	7.36	3.2428
25	3.1343	2.6717	0.9114	2.3425	11.854	16.866	14.15	14.9606	7.143	3.1343
50	3.1098	2.6724	0.9086	2.3446	11.959	16.747	14.164	19.7304	7.304	3.1098
75	3.0923	2.6675	0.9051	2.3369	11.063	14.045	12.47	14.6169	6.667	3.0923
100	3.0335	2.6241	0.9009	2.3362	11.014	13.24	12.078	20.5235	6.912	3.0335

 

Conclusion

Dielectric relaxation parameters have been determined for methylformate with 1-Butanol,1- Pentanol and 1- Hexanol prepared with various concentrations at 303K. Relaxation time changed with increasing proton donor in the liquid systems. The deviation of dielectric parameters with alcohols signifies that strength of molecular interaction of alcohols with methylformate was in the order of 1-Butanol<1-Pentanol<1-Hexanol.

Acknowledgment

The authors thank to Research and Development Centre, Department of Physics, Wollega University for provided the necessary facilities.

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest between the authors.

References

1. Lyashchenko A. K., Dunyashev V. S and   Yu A. Z. Russ. J Phys. Chem A. 2017;91:887.
2. Kompaneets V. V and Vasilieva I. A. Opt. Spectrosc. 2017;123:245.
   CrossRef
3. Kalaivani T., Krishnan S and  Nithiyanantham S. Korean. J. Chem Eng., 2017;34:2325. 
   CrossRef
4. Dwivedi D. K. Mat. Sci. Res. Ind. 2015;12:60.
   CrossRef
5. Rawal A., Mahavar., Tanwar A and Singh P J. Indian J. Pure and Appl. Phy. 2014;52:632.
6. Higasi K., Koya Y and Nakamura M. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1971;44:988.
   CrossRef
7. Eyring H and Cernuschi F.  J. Chem. Phy. 1939;7:547. 
   CrossRef
8. Palani R., Kesavasamy R and Akila M. Mat. Sci. Res. Ind. 2008;5:367.
9. Sahoo S and Sit S. K. Indian J. Phys.  2010;84:1549. 
   CrossRef
10. Elangovan S and Mullainathan S. Mat. Sci. Res. Ind. 2012;9:81.
    CrossRef

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.