Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter December 8, 2018

Development of RSM Statistical Model for Methanol Carbonylation Rate for Acetic Acid Synthesis by Using Cativa TM Technology

Nasrin Nemati and Reza Eslamlueyan


In recently developed CativaTM process, acetic acid is produced by methanol carbonylation reaction in which a complex interaction among all the major reaction species including iridium, ruthenium, methyl acetate, methyl iodide and water are observed. In this study, a statistical technique of response surface method (RSM) (which is called historical data design algorithm) is applied to investigate the concentration effects of these species on the carbonylation reaction rate. A quartic equation is fitted to the experimental data, and its suitability is examined by several statistical tests. Lack of fit, model F-value, coefficient of determination (R2), adjusted R-squared (Adj.R2) and predicted R-squared (Pre. R2) are respectively equal to 1.65, 182.73, 0.9822, 0.9768 and 0.9263. The validation of the proposed model is investigated by numerical optimization of the design-expert software. The desirability value of the model prediction is 0.94 that indicates the high agreement between the model prediction and the experimental results. The individual and binary effects of the considered parameters on the carbonylation rate are also investigated through the developed model. The steep slope/ curvature of Ir, Ru and water concentrations in perturbation plot indicates the high sensitivity of carbonylation rate to these species. The interaction effects of Ru and water on carbonylation rate show that at water concentration of 7 w/w %, a steep increase occurs in the reaction rate by increasing Ru promoter. Investigating the simultaneous effects of Ru and Ir concentrations on the carbonylation rate indicates that the increase of Ru to Ir molar ratio promotes the reaction rate by enhancing the lability of [Ir(CO)2I3Me]- complex and preventing the production of inactive species of [Ir(CO)2I4]- in the catalytic cycle.



Ir (ppm)




ith linear coefficient


ith quadratic coefficient


ith interaction coefficient


Ruthenium (ppm)


MeI (w/w %)


MeOAc (w/w %)


water (w/w %)


number of factors in the model


number of experiments


independent variable


predicted response

Greek letters


associated error


residual mean square


[1] Sriram P, Hou L, Nash M, Maronneaud O. Acetic acid, IHS chemical economics handbook. 2016.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Yoneda N, Kusano S, Yasui M, Pujado P, Wilcher S. Recent advances in processes and catalysts for the production of acetic acid. Appl Catal A Gen. 2001;221:253–65.10.1016/S0926-860X(01)00800-6Search in Google Scholar

[3] Howard MJ, Jones MD, Roberts MS, Taylor SA. C1 to acetyls: catalysis and process. Catal Today. 1993;18:325–54.10.1016/0920-5861(93)80060-ESearch in Google Scholar

[4] Hosseinpour V, Kazemeini M, Mohammadrezaee A. Optimisation of Ru-promoted Ir-catalysed methanol carbonylation utilising response surface methodology. Appl Catal A Gen. 2011;394:166–75.10.1016/j.apcata.2010.12.036Search in Google Scholar

[5] Haynes A, Maitlis PM, Morris GE, Sunley GJ, Adams H, Badger PW, et al. Promotion of Iridium-Catalyzed Methanol Carbonylation: mechanistic studies of the cativa process. J Am Chem Soc. 2004;126:2847–61.10.1021/ja039464ySearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[6] Budiman AW, Nam JS, Park JH, Mukti RI, Chang TS, Bae JW, et al. Review of Acetic Acid Synthesis from Various Feedstocks Through Different Catalytic Processes. Catal Surv from Asia. 2016;20:173–9310.1007/s10563-016-9215-9Search in Google Scholar

[7] Jones JH. The CativaTM process for the manufacture plant of acetic acid. Platin Met Rev. 2000;44:94–105.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Thomas CM, Suss-Fink G. Ligand effects in the rhodium-catalyzed carbonylation of methanol. Coord Chem Rev. 2003;243:125–42.10.1016/S0010-8545(03)00051-1Search in Google Scholar

[9] Sunley GJ, Watson DJ. High productivity methanol carbonylation catalysis using iridium: the CativaTM process for the manufacture of acetic acid. Catal Today. 2000;58:293–307.10.1016/S0920-5861(00)00263-7Search in Google Scholar

[10] Forster D, Singleton TC. Homogeneous catalytic reactions of methanol with carbon monoxide. J Mol Catal. 1982;17:299–314.10.1016/0304-5102(82)85041-4Search in Google Scholar

[11] Hosseinpour V, Kazemeini M, Mohammadrezaee A. A study of the water-gas shift reaction in Ru-promoted Ir-catalysed methanol carbonylation utilising experimental design methodology. Chem Eng Sci. 2011;66:4798–806.10.1016/j.ces.2011.06.053Search in Google Scholar

[12] Kazemeini M, Hosseinpour V. Minimizing CO2 formation in Ir-catalyzed methanol carbonylation process. Procedia Eng. 2012;42:1179–88.10.1016/j.proeng.2012.07.510Search in Google Scholar

[13] Ferreira SL, Bruns RE, Ferreira HS, Matos GD, David JM, Brando GC, et al. Box–Behnken design: an alternative for the optimization of analytical methods. Anal Chim Acta. 2007;597:179–86.10.1016/j.aca.2007.07.011Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[14] Forster D. Kinetic and spectroscopic studies of the carbonylation of methanol with an iodide-promoted iridium catalyst. J Chem Soc, Dalton Trans. 1979:1639–4510.1039/dt9790001639Search in Google Scholar

[15] Paulik FE, Roth JF. Novel catalysts for the low-pressure carbonylation of methanol to acetic acid. Chem Commun (London). 1968:1578. DOI: 10.1039/C1968001578ASearch in Google Scholar

[16] Jiao SS, Li D, Huang ZG, Zhang ZS, Bhandari B, Chen XD, et al. Optimization of supercritical carbon dioxide extraction of flaxseed oil using response surface methodology. Int J Food Eng. 2008;4:1–17.10.2202/1556-3758.1409Search in Google Scholar

[17] Teruel ML, Gontier E, Bienaime C, Saucedo JE, Barbotin JN. Response surface analysis of chlortetracycline and tetracycline production with K-carrageenan immobilized Streptomyces aureofaciens. Enzyme Microb Tech. 1997;21:314–20.10.1016/S0141-0229(97)00045-8Search in Google Scholar

[18] Sajilata MG, Singhal RS, Kamat MY. Supercritical CO2 extraction of γ-linolenic acid (GLA) from Spirulina platensis ARM 740 using response surface methodology. J Food Eng. 2008;84:321–6.10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2007.05.028Search in Google Scholar

[19] Francis F, Sabu A, Nampoothiri KM, Ramachandran S, Ghosh S, Szakacs G, et al. Use of response surface methodology for optimizing process parameters for the production of a-amylase by Aspergillus oryzae. Biochem Eng J. 2003;15:107–15.10.1016/S1369-703X(02)00192-4Search in Google Scholar

[20] Krishna SH, Manohar B, Divakar S, Prapulla SG, Karanth NG. Optimization of isoamyl acetate production by using immobilized lipase from Mucor miehei by response surface methodology. Enzyme Microb Technol. 2000;26:131–6.10.1016/S0141-0229(99)00149-0Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[21] Vohra A, Satyanarayana T. Statistical optimization of medium components by response surface methodology to enhance phytase production by Pichia anomala. Process Biochem. 2002;37:999–1004.10.1016/S0032-9592(01)00308-9Search in Google Scholar

[22] Box GE, Wilson KB. On the experimental attainment of optimum multifactorial conditions. R Stat Soc. 1951;13:1–12.Search in Google Scholar

[23] Singh SK, Dodge J, Durrani MJ, Khan MA. Optimization and characterization of controlled release pellets coated with an experimental latex. I. Anionic drug. Int J Pharm. 1995;125:243–55.10.1016/0378-5173(95)00135-6Search in Google Scholar

[24] Sanchez-Lafuente C, Furlanetto S, Fernandez-Arevalo M. Didanosine extended-release matrix tablets: optimization of formulation variables using statistical experimental design. Int J Pharm. 2002;237:107–18.10.1016/S0378-5173(02)00028-5Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[25] Ay F, Catalkaya EC, Kargi F. A statistical experiment design approach for advanced oxidation of Direct Red azo-dye by photo-Fenton treatment. J Hazard Mater. 2009;162:230–6.10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.05.027Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[26] Sanal IS. Determination of optimum conditions for SC-(CO2+ethanol) extraction of β-carotene from apricot pomace using response surface methodology. J Supercrit Fluids. 2005;34:331–8.10.1016/j.supflu.2004.08.005Search in Google Scholar

[27] Sunley JG, Watt RJ. Iridium catalyzed carbonylation process for the production of acetic acid. United States Patent No. 5,883,295. 1999.Search in Google Scholar

[28] Mason RL, Gunst RF, Hess JL. Statistical design and analysis of experiments with applications to engineering and science, 2nd ed. USA: John Wiley and Sons; 2003.10.1002/0471458503Search in Google Scholar

[29] Montgomery DC. Design analysis of experiments, 4th ed. USA: John Wiley and Sons; 1996.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2018-08-12
Revised: 2018-10-15
Accepted: 2018-11-19
Published Online: 2018-12-08

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston