properties of gases and liquids

11-2 Basic Concepts and Definitions / 11.111-3 Diffusion Coefficients for Binary Gas Systems at Low Pressures: Prediction from 11-7 Diffusion in Multicomponent Gas Mixtures / 11.19 11-8 Di

THE PROPERTIES OF GASES AND LIQUIDS

New York Chicago San Francisco Lisbon London

Madrid Mexico City Milan New Delhi San Juan Seoul Singapore Sydney Toronto

Copyright © 2001, 1987, 1977, 1966, 1958 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means,

or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher 0-07-149999-7

The material in this eBook also appears in the print version of this title: 0-07-011682-2.

All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners Rather than put a trademark symbol after every occurrence of a trademarked name, we use names in an editorial fashion only, and to the bene- fit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark Where such designa- tions appear in this book, they have been printed with initial caps

McGraw-Hill eBooks are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales tions, or for use in corporate training programs For more information, please contact George Hoare, Special Sales, at george_hoare@mcgraw-hill.com or (212) 904-4069

promo-TERMS OF USE

This is a copyrighted work and The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc (“McGraw-Hill”) and its licensors reserve all rights in and to the work Use of this work is subject to these terms Except as permitted under the Copyright Act of 1976 and the right to store and retrieve one copy of the work, you may not decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, reproduce, modify, create derivative works based upon, transmit, distribute, disseminate, sell, publish or sublicense the work or any part of it without McGraw-Hill’s prior consent You may use the work for your own noncommercial and personal use; any other use of the work is strictly prohibited Your right to use the work may be terminated if you fail to comply with these terms

THE WORK IS PROVIDED “AS IS.” McGRAW-HILL AND ITS LICENSORS MAKE NO ANTEES OR WARRANTIES AS TO THE ACCURACY, ADEQUACY OR COMPLETENESS OF

GUAR-OR RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM USING THE WGUAR-ORK, INCLUDING ANY INFGUAR-ORMA- TION THAT CAN BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE WORK VIA HYPERLINK OR OTHERWISE, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE McGraw-Hill and its licensors do not warrant or guarantee that the func- tions contained in the work will meet your requirements or that its operation will be uninterrupted or error free Neither McGraw-Hill nor its licensors shall be liable to you or anyone else for any inaccu- racy, error or omission, regardless of cause, in the work or for any damages resulting therefrom McGraw-Hill has no responsibility for the content of any information accessed through the work Under no circumstances shall McGraw-Hill and/or its licensors be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, punitive, consequential or similar damages that result from the use of or inability to use the work, even if any of them has been advised of the possibility of such damages This limitation of lia- bility shall apply to any claim or cause whatsoever whether such claim or cause arises in contract, tort

INFORMA-or otherwise

DOI: 10.1036/0070116822

We hope you enjoy this McGraw-Hill eBook! If you’d like more information about this book, its author, or related books and websites,

please click here.

Professional

Want to learn more?

1-4 Organization of the Book / 1.6

2-1 Scope / 2.1

2-2 Vapor-Liquid Critical Properties / 2.2

2-3 Acentric Factor / 2.23

2-4 Boiling and Freezing Points / 2.26

2-5 Discussion of Estimation Methods for Pure Component Constants / 2.33

2-6 Dipole Moments / 2.34

2-7 Availability of Data and Computer Software / 2.35

3-1 Scope and Definitions / 3.1

4-1 Scope / 4.1

4-2 Introduction to Volumetric Properties / 4.1

4-3 Corresponding States Principle / 4.5

4-4 Equations of State / 4.8

4-5 Virial Equation of State / 4.11

4-6 Analytical Equations of State / 4.17

4-7 Nonanalytic Equations of State / 4.25

4-8 Discussion of Equations of State / 4.31

4-9 PVT Properties of Liquids—General Considerations / 4.32

For more information about this title, click here

4-10 Estimation of the Liquid Molar Volume at the Normal Boiling Point / 4.33 4-11 Saturated Liquid Densities as a Function of Temperature / 4.35

4-12 Compressed Liquid Densities / 4.43

5-1 Scope / 5.1

5-2 Mixture Properties—General Discussion / 5.2

5-3 Corresponding States Principle (CSP): The Pseudocritical Method / 5.5

5-4 Virial Equations of State for Mixtures / 5.8

5-5 Analytical Equations of State for Mixtures / 5.12

5-6 Nonanalytic Equations of State for Mixtures / 5.18

5-7 Discussion of Mixture Equations of State / 5.22

5-8 Densities of Liquid Mixtures at Their Bubble Point / 5.23

5-9 Densities of Compressed Liquid Mixtures / 5.26

6-1 Scope / 6.1

6-2 Fundamental Thermodynamic Relationships for Pure Components / 6.1

6-3 Departure Functions for Thermodynamic Properties / 6.4

6-4 Evaluation of Departure Functions for Equations of State / 6.6

6-5 Heat Capacities of Real Gases / 6.16

6-6 Heat Capacities of Liquids / 6.17

6-7 Partial Properties and Fugacities of Components in Mixtures / 6.26

6-8 True Critical Points of Mixtures / 6.30

7-1 Scope / 7.1

7-2 Theory / 7.1

7-3 Correlation and Extrapolation of Vapor-Pressure Data / 7.3

7-4 Ambrose-Walton Corresponding-States Method / 7.7

7-5 Riedel Corresponding-States Method / 7.9

7-6 Discussion and Recommendations for Vapor-Pressure Estimation and

Correlation / 7.11

7-7 Enthalpy of Vaporization of Pure Compounds / 7.13

7-8 Estimation of ⌬Hv from Vapor-Pressure Equations / 7.14

7-9 Estimation of ⌬Hv from the Law of Corresponding States / 7.16

7-10 ⌬Hv at the Normal Boiling Point / 7.19

7-11 Variation of ⌬Hv with Temperature / 7.23

7-12 Discussion and Recommendations for Enthalpy of Vaporization / 7.24

7-13 Enthalpy of Fusion / 7.25

7-14 Enthalpy of Sublimation; Vapor Pressures of Solids / 7.28

8-1 Scope / 8.1

8-2 Thermodynamics of Vapor-Liquid Equilibria / 8.9

CONTENTS v

8-3 Fugacity of a Pure Liquid / 8.11

8-4 Simplifications in the Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium Relation / 8.12

8-5 Activity Coefficients; Gibbs-Duham Equation and Excess Gibbs Energy / 8.12

8-6 Calculation of Low-Pressure Binary Vapor-Liquid Equilibria with Activity

Coefficients / 8.19

8-7 Effect of Temperature on Low-Pressure Vapor-Liquid Equilibria / 8.22

8-8 Binary Vapor-Liquid Equilibria: Low-Pressure Examples / 8.23

8-9 Multicomponent Vapor-Liquid Equilibria at Low Pressure / 8.32

8-10 Determination of Activity Coefficients / 8.42

8-11 Phase Equilibrium with Henry’s Law / 8.111

8-12 Vapor-Liquid Equilibria with Equations of State / 8.120

8-13 Solubilities of Solids in High-Pressure Gases / 8.158

8-14 Liquid-Liquid Equilibria / 8.159

8-15 Phase Equilibria in Polymer Solutions / 8.177

8-16 Solubilities of Solids in Liquids / 8.180

8-17 Aqueous Solutions of Electrolytes / 8.191

8-18 Concluding Remarks / 8.193

9-1 Scope / 9.1

9-2 Definitions of Units of Viscosity / 9.1

9-3 Theory of Gas Transport Properties / 9.2

9-4 Estimation of Low-Pressure Gas Viscosity / 9.4

9-5 Viscosities of Gas Mixtures at Low Pressures / 9.15

9-6 Effect of Pressure on the Viscosity of Pure Gases / 9.29

9-7 Viscosity of Gas Mixtures at High Pressures / 9.47

9-8 Liquid Viscosity / 9.51

9-9 Effect of High Pressure on Liquid Viscosity / 9.55

9-10 Effect of Temperature on Liquid Viscosity / 9.56

9-11 Estimation of Low-Temperature Liquid Viscosity / 9.59

9-12 Estimation of Liquid Viscosity at High Temperatures / 9.75

9-13 Liquid Mixture Viscosity / 9.77

10-1 Scope / 10.1

10-2 Theory of Thermal Conductivity / 10.1

10-3 Thermal Conductivities of Polyatomic Gases / 10.2

10-4 Effect of Temperature on the Low-Pressure Thermal Conductivities of Gases / 10.18 10-5 Effect of Pressure on the Thermal Conductivities of Gases / 10.18

10-6 Thermal Conductivities of Low-Pressure Gas Mixtures / 10.29

10-7 Thermal Conductivities of Gas Mixtures at High Pressures / 10.35

10-8 Thermal Conductivities of Liquids / 10.42

10-9 Estimation of the Thermal Conductivities of Pure Liquids / 10.44

10-10 Effect of Temperature on the Thermal Conductivities of Liquids / 10.51

10-11 Effect of Pressure on the Thermal Conductivities of Liquids / 10.52

10-12 Thermal Conductivities of Liquid Mixtures / 10.56

11-1 Scope / 11.1

11-2 Basic Concepts and Definitions / 11.1

11-3 Diffusion Coefficients for Binary Gas Systems at Low Pressures: Prediction from

11-7 Diffusion in Multicomponent Gas Mixtures / 11.19

11-8 Diffusion in Liquids: Theory / 11.20

11-9 Estimation of Binary Liquid Diffusion Coefficients at Infinite Dilution / 11.21 11-10 Concentration Dependence of Binary Liquid Diffusion Coefficients / 11.33 11-11 The Effects of Temperature and Pressure on Diffusion in Liquids / 11.38

11-12 Diffusion in Multicomponent Liquid Mixtures / 11.41

11-13 Diffusion in Electrolyte Solutions / 11.43

12-1 Scope / 12.1

12-2 Introduction / 12.1

12-3 Estimation of Pure-Liquid Surface Tension / 12.2

12-4 Variation of Pure-Liquid Surface Tension with Temperature / 12.11

12-5 Surface Tensions of Mixtures / 12.12

Appendix A Property Data Bank A.1

Appendix B Lennard-Jones Potentials as Determined from Viscosity Data B.1 Appendix C Group Contributions for Multiproperty Methods C.1

Index follows Appendix C

PREFACE

Reliable values of the properties of materials are necessary for the design of dustrial processes An enormous amount of data has been collected and correlatedover the years, but the rapid advance of technology into new fields seems always

in-to maintain a significant gap between demand and availability The engineer is stillrequired to rely primarily on common sense, experience, and a variety of methodsfor estimating physical properties

This book presents a critical review of various estimation procedures for a ited number of properties of gases and liquids: critical and other pure component

lim-properties; PVT and thermodynamic properties of pure components and mixtures;

vapor pressures and phase-change enthalpies; standard enthalpies of formation;standard Gibbs energies of formation; heat capacities; surface tensions; viscosities;thermal conductivities; diffusion coefficients; and phase equilibria For most cases,estimated properties are compared to experiment to indicate reliability Most meth-ods are illustrated by examples

The procedures described are necessarily limited to those that appear to theauthors to have the greatest validity and practical use Wherever possible, we haveincluded recommendations delineating the best methods for estimating each prop-erty and the most reliable techniques for extrapolating or interpolating availabledata

Although the book is intended to serve primarily the practicing engineer, cially the process or chemical engineer, other engineers and scientists concernedwith gases and liquids may find it useful

espe-The first edition of this book was published in 1958, the second in 1966, thethird in 1977 and the fourth in 1987 In a sense, each edition is a new book becausenumerous estimation methods are proposed each year; over a (roughly) 10-yearspan, many earlier methods are modified or displaced by more accurate or moregeneral techniques While most estimation methods rely heavily on empiricism, thebetter ones—those that are most reliable—often have a theoretical basis In somecases, the theory is outlined to provide the user with the foundation of the proposedestimation method

There are some significant differences between the current edition and the ceding one:

pre-1 Chapter 2 includes several extensive new group-contribution methods as well

as discussion and comparisons of methods based on descriptors calculated withquantum-mechanical methods Direct comparisons are given for more than 200substances with data in Appendix A

2 Chapter 3 includes several new methods as well as updated Benson-Method

tables for ideal-gas properties of formation and heat capacities Direct parisons are given for more than 100 substances with data in Appendix A

com-3 Chapter 4 includes presentation of current equations of state for pure

compo-nents with complete formulae for many models, especially cubics A new

sec-Copyright © 2001, 1987, 1977, 1966, 1958 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc

Click here for terms of use

tion discusses issues associated with near-critical and very high pressure tems The Lee–Kesler corresponding-states tables, readily available elsewhere,have been removed.

sys-4 Chapter 5 includes presentation of current equations of state for mixtures with

complete formulae for many models, especially cubics A new section discussescurrent mixing and combining rules for equation-of-state parameters with at-tention to inconsistencies

5 Chapter 6 includes a revised introduction to thermodynamic properties from

equations of state with complete formulae for cubics A new section discussesreal-gas and liquid heat capacities Because they are readily available else-where, the Lee–Kesler corresponding-states tables have been removed

6 Chapter 7 gives attention to one form of the Wagner equation that appears to

be particularly successful for representing vapor pressures, and to the usefultables of Majer and Svoboda for enthalpies of vaporization Also included is anew discussion of the entropy of fusion

7 Chapter 8 has been extended to include discussion of systems containing solids,

a new correlation by Eckert et al for activity coefficents at infinite dilution,and some new methods for high-pressure vapor-liquid equilibria, includingthose based on Wong–Sandler mixing rules

8 In Chapters 9–12, most of the new methods for transport properties are based

on thermodynamic data or molecular-thermodynamic models The successfulTRAPP method (from the National Institute of Science and Technology) is nowexplained in more detail

9 The property data bank in Appendix A has been completely revised Most of

the properties are the same as in the last edition, but the format has beenchanged to identify the sources of values The introduction to Appendix Adescribes the definitions and font usage of the data bank

We selected only those substances for which we could readily obtain anevaluated experimental critical temperature; the total number of compounds isfewer than in the last edition All of the entries in Appendix A were takenfrom tabulations of the Thermodynamics Research Center (TRC), College Sta-tion, TX, USA, or from other reliable sources as listed in the Appendix Wealso used experimentally-based results for other properties from the samesources whenever available Some estimated values are also included

We tabulate the substances in alphabetical formula order IUPAC names areused, with some common names added, and Chemical Abstracts Registry num-bers are given for each compound We indicate origins of the properties byusing different fonts We are grateful to TRC for permitting us to publish asignificant portion of their values

10 Appendix C presents complete tables of parameters for the multi-property

group-contribution methods of Joback and of Constantinou and Gani.The authors want to acknowledge with thanks significant contributions fromcolleagues who provided assistance in preparing the current edition; their help hasbeen essential and we are grateful to them all: David Bush, Joe Downey, CharlesEckert, Michael Frenkel, Rafiqui Gani and students of the CAPEC Center at theTechnical University of Denmark, Lucinda Garnes, Steven Garrison, Nathan Erb,

K R Hall, Keith Harrison, Marcia Huber, Kevin Joback, Kim Knuth, Claude bovicci, Paul Mathias, Amy Nelson, Van Nguyen, Chorng Twu, Philippe Ungererand Randolph Wilhoit

Lei-PREFACE ix

For her patient and devoted service in performing numerous editorial tasks, wegive special thanks to Nanci Poling We are grateful to Nanci and also to VernaO’Connell and Susan Prausnitz for their encouragement and support during thisproject

While we regret that the original author, Robert Reid, elected not to participate

in the preparation of this edition, we nevertheless want to record here our gratitude

to him for his pioneering leadership in establishing and collecting estimation ods for physical properties of fluids as required for chemical process and productdesign

meth-B E Poling

J M Prausnitz

J P O’Connell

knowl-The physical properties of every substance depend directly on the nature of themolecules of the substance Therefore, the ultimate generalization of physical prop-erties of fluids will require a complete understanding of molecular behavior, which

we do not yet have Though its origins are ancient, the molecular theory was notgenerally accepted until about the beginning of the nineteenth century, and eventhen there were setbacks until experimental evidence vindicated the theory early inthe twentieth century Many pieces of the puzzle of molecular behavior have nowfallen into place and computer simulation can now describe more and more complexsystems, but as yet it has not been possible to develop a complete generalization

In the nineteenth century, the observations of Charles and Gay-Lussac were

was perhaps the first important correlation of properties Deviations from the gas law, though often small, were finally tied to the fundamental nature of themolecules The equation of van der Waals, the virial equation, and other equations

ideal-of state express these quantitatively Such extensions ideal-of the ideal-gas law have notonly facilitated progress in the development of a molecular theory but, more im-portant for our purposes here, have provided a framework for correlating physicalproperties of fluids

The original ‘‘hard-sphere’’ kinetic theory of gases was a significant contribution

to progress in understanding the statistical behavior of a system containing a largenumber of molecules Thermodynamic and transport properties were related quan-titatively to molecular size and speed Deviations from the hard-sphere kinetic the-ory led to studies of the interactions of molecules based on the realization thatmolecules attract at intermediate separations and repel when they come very close.The semiempirical potential functions of Lennard-Jones and others describe attrac-tion and repulsion in approximately quantitative fashion More recent potentialfunctions allow for the shapes of molecules and for asymmetric charge distribution

in polar molecules

Copyright © 2001, 1987, 1977, 1966, 1958 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc

Click here for terms of use

Although allowance for the forces of attraction and repulsion between molecules

is primarily a development of the twentieth century, the concept is not new Inabout 1750, Boscovich suggested that molecules (which he referred to as atoms)are ‘‘endowed with potential force, that any two atoms attract or repel each otherwith a force depending on their distance apart At large distances the attractionvaries as the inverse square of the distance The ultimate force is a repulsion whichincreases without limit as the distance decreases without limit, so that the two atomscan never coincide’’ (Maxwell 1875)

From the viewpoint of mathematical physics, the development of a sive molecular theory would appear to be complete J C Slater (1955) observedthat, while we are still seeking the laws of nuclear physics, ‘‘in the physics ofatoms, molecules and solids, we have found the laws and are exploring the deduc-tions from them.’’ However, the suggestion that, in principle (the Schro¨dinger equa-tion of quantum mechanics), everything is known about molecules is of little com-fort to the engineer who needs to know the properties of some new chemical todesign a commercial product or plant

comprehen-Paralleling the continuing refinement of the molecular theory has been the velopment of thermodynamics and its application to properties The two are inti-mately related and interdependent Carnot was an engineer interested in steam en-gines, but the second law of thermodynamics was shown by Clausius, Kelvin,Maxwell, and especially by Gibbs to have broad applications in all branches ofscience

de-Thermodynamics by itself cannot provide physical properties; only moleculartheory or experiment can do that But thermodynamics reduces experimental ortheoretical efforts by relating one physical property to another For example, theClausius-Clapeyron equation provides a useful method for obtaining enthalpies ofvaporization from more easily measured vapor pressures

The second law led to the concept of chemical potential which is basic to anunderstanding of chemical and phase equilibria, and the Maxwell relations provide

ways to obtain important thermodynamic properties of a substance from PVTx lations where x stands for composition Since derivatives are often required, the

re-PVTx function must be known accurately.

The Information Age is providing a ‘‘shifting paradigm in the art and practice

of physical properties data’’ (Dewan and Moore, 1999) where searching the WorldWide Web can retrieve property information from sources and at rates unheard of

a few years ago Yet despite the many handbooks and journals devoted to lation and critical review of physical-property data, it is inconceivable that all de-sired experimental data will ever be available for the thousands of compounds ofinterest in science and industry, let alone all their mixtures Thus, in spite of im-pressive developments in molecular theory and information access, the engineerfrequently finds a need for physical properties for which no experimental data areavailable and which cannot be calculated from existing theory

compi-While the need for accurate design data is increasing, the rate of accumulation

of new data is not increasing fast enough Data on multicomponent mixtures areparticularly scarce The process engineer who is frequently called upon to design

a plant to produce a new chemical (or a well-known chemical in a new way) oftenfinds that the required physical-property data are not available It may be possible

to obtain the desired properties from new experimental measurements, but that isoften not practical because such measurements tend to be expensive and time-consuming To meet budgetary and deadline requirements, the process engineeralmost always must estimate at least some of the properties required for design

THE ESTIMATION OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 1.3

1-2 ESTIMATION OF PROPERTIES

In the all-too-frequent situation where no experimental value of the needed property

is at hand, the value must be estimated or predicted ‘‘Estimation’’ and ‘‘prediction’’are often used as if they were synonymous, although the former properly carriesthe frank implication that the result may be only approximate Estimates may bebased on theory, on correlations of experimental values, or on a combination ofboth A theoretical relation, although not strictly valid, may nevertheless serve ad-equately in specific cases

For example, to relate mass and volumetric flow rates of air through an

may properly use Dalton’s law and the vapor pressure of water to calculate themass fraction of water in saturated air However, the engineer must be able to judgethe operating pressure at which such simple calculations lead to unacceptable error.Completely empirical correlations are often useful, but one must avoid the temp-tation to use them outside the narrow range of conditions on which they are based

In general, the stronger the theoretical basis, the more reliable the correlation.Most of the better estimation methods use equations based on the form of anincomplete theory with empirical correlations of the parameters that are not pro-vided by that theory Introduction of empiricism into parts of a theoretical relationprovides a powerful method for developing a reliable correlation For example, the

N⫽1,

a

Equation (1-2.1) is based on the idea that the pressure on a container wall, exerted

by the impinging molecules, is decreased because of the attraction by the mass ofmolecules in the bulk gas; that attraction rises with density Further, the availablespace in which the molecules move is less than the total volume by the excluded

volume b due to the size of the molecules themselves Therefore, the ‘‘constants’’ (or parameters) a and b have some theoretical basis though the best descriptions

require them to vary with conditions, that is, temperature and density The

corre-lation of a and b in terms of other properties of a substance is an example of the

use of an empirically modified theoretical form

Empirical extension of theory can often lead to a correlation useful for estimationpurposes For example, several methods for estimating diffusion coefficients in low-pressure binary gas systems are empirical modifications of the equation given bythe simple kinetic theory for non-attracting spheres Almost all the better estimationprocedures are based on correlations developed in this way

An ideal system for the estimation of a physical property would (1) provide reliablephysical and thermodynamic properties for pure substances and for mixtures at anytemperature, pressure, and composition, (2) indicate the phase (solid, liquid, or gas),(3) require a minimum of input data, (4) choose the least-error route (i.e., the best

estimation method), (5) indicate the probable error, and (6) minimize computationtime Few of the available methods approach this ideal, but some serve remarkablywell Thanks to modern computers, computation time is usually of little concern.

In numerous practical cases, the most accurate method may not be the best forthe purpose Many engineering applications properly require only approximate es-timates, and a simple estimation method requiring little or no input data is oftenpreferred over a complex, possibly more accurate correlation The simple gas law

is useful at low to modest pressures, although more accurate correlations are able Unfortunately, it is often not easy to provide guidance on when to reject thesimpler in favor of the more complex (but more accurate) method; the decisionoften depends on the problem, not the system

avail-Although a variety of molecular theories may be useful for data correlation,there is one theory which is particularly helpful This theory, called the law ofcorresponding states or the corresponding-states principle, was originally based onmacroscopic arguments, but its modern form has a molecular basis

The Law of Corresponding States

Proposed by van der Waals in 1873, the law of corresponding states expresses thegeneralization that equilibrium properties that depend on certain intermolecularforces are related to the critical properties in a universal way Corresponding statesprovides the single most important basis for the development of correlations andestimation methods In 1873, van der Waals showed it to be theoretically valid for

all pure substances whose PVT properties could be expressed by a two-constant

equation of state such as Eq (1-2.1) As shown by Pitzer in 1939, it is similarlyvalid if the intermolecular potential function requires only two characteristic pa-rameters Corresponding states holds well for fluids containing simple moleculesand, upon semiempirical extension with a single additional parameter, it also holdsfor ‘‘normal’’ fluids where molecular orientation is not important, i.e., for moleculesthat are not strongly polar or hydrogen-bonded

The relation of pressure to volume at constant temperature is different for ferent substances; however, two-parameter corresponding states theory asserts that

dif-if pressure, volume, and temperature are divided by the corresponding critical erties, the function relating reduced pressure to reduced volume and reduced tem-perature becomes the same for all substances The reduced property is commonly

prop-expressed as a fraction of the critical property: P r⫽ P / P c ; V r⫽V / V c ; and T r⫽

T / T c

To illustrate corresponding states, Fig 1-1 shows reduced PVT data for methane

and nitrogen In effect, the critical point is taken as the origin The data for saturatedliquid and saturated vapor coincide well for the two substances The isotherms

(constant T r), of which only one is shown, agree equally well

Successful application of the law of corresponding states for correlation of PVT

data has encouraged similar correlations of other properties that depend primarily

on intermolecular forces Many of these have proved valuable to the practicingengineer Modifications of the law are commonly made to improve accuracy or ease

of use Good correlations of high-pressure gas viscosity have been obtained byexpressing␩/␩c as a function of P r and T r But since␩cis seldom known and noteasily estimated, this quantity has been replaced in other correlations by othercharacteristics such as␩⬚c,␩⬚T,or the groupM1 / 2P2 / 3c T1 / 6c ,where␩⬚cis the viscosity

at T c and low pressure,␩⬚T is the viscosity at the temperature of interest, again at

THE ESTIMATION OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 1.5

FIGURE 1-1 The law of corresponding states applied to the PVT

properties of methane and nitrogen Literature values (Din, 1961): 䡩

methane, ● nitrogen.

the law of corresponding states but essentially empirical as applied to transportproperties

The two-parameter law of corresponding states can be derived from statisticalmechanics when severe simplifications are introduced into the partition function.Sometimes other useful results can be obtained by introducing less severe simpli-fications into statistical mechanics to provide a more general framework for thedevelopment of estimation methods Fundamental equations describing variousproperties (including transport properties) can sometimes be derived, provided that

an expression is available for the potential-energy function for molecular tions This function may be, at least in part, empirical; but the fundamental equa-tions for properties are often insensitive to details in the potential function fromwhich they stem, and two-constant potential functions frequently serve remarkablywell Statistical mechanics is not commonly linked to engineering practice, but there

interac-is good reason to believe it will become increasingly useful, especially when bined with computer simulations and with calculations of intermolecular forces bycomputational chemistry Indeed, anticipated advances in atomic and molecularphysics, coupled with ever-increasing computing power, are likely to augment sig-nificantly our supply of useful physical-property information

com-Nonpolar and Polar Molecules

two-constant law of corresponding states However, nonspherical and weakly polarmolecules do not fit as well; deviations are often great enough to encourage de-velopment of correlations using a third parameter, e.g., the acentric factor,␻ Theacentric factor is obtained from the deviation of the experimental vapor pressure–temperature function from that which might be expected for a similar substance

consisting of small spherically-symmetric molecules Typical corresponding-states

correlations express a desired dimensionless property as a function of P r , T r, andthe chosen third parameter

Unfortunately, the properties of strongly polar molecules are often not torily represented by the two- or three-constant correlations which do so well fornonpolar molecules An additional parameter based on the dipole moment has oftenbeen suggested but with limited success, since polar molecules are not easily char-acterized by using only the dipole moment and critical constants As a result, al-though good correlations exist for properties of nonpolar fluids, similar correlationsfor polar fluids are often not available or else show restricted reliability

satisfac-Structure and Bonding

All macroscopic properties are related to molecular structure and the bonds betweenatoms, which determine the magnitude and predominant type of the intermolecularforces For example, structure and bonding determine the energy storage capacity

of a molecule and thus the molecule’s heat capacity

This concept suggests that a macroscopic property can be calculated from groupcontributions The relevant characteristics of structure are related to the atoms,atomic groups, bond type, etc.; to them we assign weighting factors and then de-termine the property, usually by an algebraic operation that sums the contributionsfrom the molecule’s parts Sometimes the calculated sum of the contributions is notfor the property itself but instead is for a correction to the property as calculated

by some simplified theory or empirical rule For example, the methods of Lydersen

and of others for estimating T cstart with the loose rule that the ratio of the normalboiling temperature to the critical temperature is about 2:3 Additive structural in-crements based on bond types are then used to obtain empirical corrections to thatratio

Some of the better correlations of ideal-gas heat capacities employ theoretical

determined by contributions from the constituent atoms, atomic groups, and types

of bonds

Reliable experimental data are always to be preferred over results obtained byestimation methods A variety of tabulated data banks is now available althoughmany of these banks are proprietary A good example of a readily accessible databank is provided by DIPPR, published by the American Institute of Chemical En-gineers A limited data bank is given at the end of this book But all too oftenreliable data are not available

The property data bank in Appendix A contains only substances with an uated experimental critical temperature The contents of Appendix A were takeneither from the tabulations of the Thermodynamics Research Center (TRC), CollegeStation, TX, USA, or from other reliable sources as listed in Appendix A Sub-stances are tabulated in alphabetical-formula order IUPAC names are listed, withsome common names added, and Chemical Abstracts Registry numbers are indi-cated

eval-THE ESTIMATION OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 1.7

FIGURE 1-2 Mollier diagram for methane The solid lines represent measured data.

dichlorodifluoro-Dashed lines and points represent results obtained by timation methods when only the chemical formula and the normal boiling temperature are known.

es-In this book, the various estimation methods are correlations of experimentaldata The best are based on theory, with empirical corrections for the theory’sdefects Others, including those stemming from the law of corresponding states, arebased on generalizations that are partly empirical but nevertheless have application

to a remarkably wide range of properties Totally empirical correlations are usefulonly when applied to situations very similar to those used to establish the corre-lations

The text includes many numerical examples to illustrate the estimation methods,especially those that are recommended Almost all of them are designed to explainthe calculation procedure for a single property However, most engineering designproblems require estimation of several properties; the error in each contributes tothe overall result, but some individual errors are more important that others For-tunately, the result is often adequate for engineering purposes, in spite of the largemeasure of empiricism incorporated in so many of the estimation procedures and

in spite of the potential for inconsistencies when different models are used fordifferent properties

As an example, consider the case of a chemist who has synthesized a newcompound (chemical formula CCl2F2) that boils at⫺20.5⬚C at atmospheric pressure.Using only this information, is it possible to obtain a useful prediction of whether

or not the substance has the thermodynamic properties that might make it a practicalrefrigerant?

Figure 1-2 shows portions of a Mollier diagram developed by prediction methodsdescribed in later chapters The dashed curves and points are obtained from esti-mates of liquid and vapor heat capacities, critical properties, vapor pressure, en-

thalpy of vaporization, and pressure corrections to ideal-gas enthalpies and pies The substance is, of course, a well-known refrigerant, and its known propertiesare shown by the solid curves While environmental concerns no longer permit use

entro-of CCl2F2, it nevertheless serves as a good example of building a full descriptionfrom very little information

For a standard refrigeration cycle operating between 48.9 and⫺6.7⬚C, the orator and condenser pressures are estimated to be 2.4 and 12.4 bar, vs the knownvalues 2.4 and 11.9 bar The estimate of the heat absorption in the evaporator checksclosely, and the estimated volumetric vapor rate to the compressor also shows goodagreement: 2.39 versus 2.45 m3/ hr per kW of refrigeration (This number indicatesthe size of the compressor.) Constant-entropy lines are not shown in Fig 1-2, but

evap-it is found that the constant-entropy line through the point for the low-pressurevapor essentially coincides with the saturated vapor curve The estimated coefficient

of performance (ratio of refrigeration rate to isentropic compression power) is timated to be 3.8; the value obtained from the data is 3.5 This is not a very goodcheck, but it is nevertheless remarkable because the only data used for the estimatewere the normal boiling point and the chemical formula

es-Most estimation methods require parameters that are characteristic of single purecomponents or of constituents of a mixture of interest The more important of theseare considered in Chap 2

The thermodynamic properties of ideal gases, such as enthalpies and Gibbs ergies of formation and heat capacities, are covered in Chap 3 Chapter 4 describes

en-the PVT properties of pure fluids with en-the corresponding-states principle, equations

of state, and methods restricted to liquids Chapter 5 extends the methods of Chap

4 to mixtures with the introduction of mixing and combining rules as well as thespecial effects of interactions between different components Chapter 6 covers otherthermodynamic properties such as enthalpy, entropy, free energies and heat capac-ities of real fluids from equations of state and correlations for liquids It also intro-duces partial properties and discusses the estimation of true vapor-liquid criticalpoints

Chapter 7 discusses vapor pressures and enthalpies of vaporization of pure stances Chapter 8 presents techniques for estimation and correlation of phase equi-libria in mixtures Chapters 9 to 11 describe estimation methods for viscosity, ther-mal conductivity, and diffusion coefficients Surface tension is considered briefly inChap 12

sub-The literature searched was voluminous, and the lists of references followingeach chapter represent but a fraction of the material examined Of the many esti-mation methods available, in most cases only a few were selected for detaileddiscussion These were selected on the basis of their generality, accuracy, and avail-ability of required input data Tests of all methods were often more extensive thanthose suggested by the abbreviated tables comparing experimental with estimatedvalues However, no comparison is adequate to indicate expected errors for newcompounds The average errors given in the comparison tables represent but a crudeoverall evaluation; the inapplicability of a method for a few compounds may soincrease the average error as to distort judgment of the method’s merit, althoughefforts have been made to minimize such distortion

Many estimation methods are of such complexity that a computer is required.This is less of a handicap than it once was, since computers and efficient computerprograms have become widely available Electronic desk computers, which havebecome so popular in recent years, have made the more complex correlations prac-tical However, accuracy is not necessarily enhanced by greater complexity.The scope of the book is inevitably limited The properties discussed were se-lected arbitrarily because they are believed to be of wide interest, especially to

THE ESTIMATION OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 1.9

chemical engineers Electrical properties are not included, nor are the properties ofsalts, metals, or alloys or chemical properties other than some thermodynamicallyderived properties such as enthalpy and the Gibbs energy of formation

This book is intended to provide estimation methods for a limited number ofphysical properties of fluids Hopefully, the need for such estimates, and for a book

of this kind, may diminish as more experimental values become available and asthe continually developing molecular theory advances beyond its present incompletestate In the meantime, estimation methods are essential for most process-designcalculations and for many other purposes in engineering and applied science

REFERENCES

Dewan, A K., and M A Moore: ‘‘Physical Property Data Resources for the Practicing Engineer / Scientist in Today’s Information Age,’’ Paper 89C, AIChE 1999 Spring National Mtg., Houston, TX, March, 1999 Copyright Equilon Enterprise LLC.

Din, F., (ed.): Thermodynamic Functions of Gases, Vol 3, Butterworth, London, 1961 Maxwell, James Clerk: ‘‘Atoms,’’ Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th ed., A & C Black, Edin-

burgh, 1875–1888.

Slater, J C.: Modern Physics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1955.

used as the basis for models such as corresponding states correlations for PVT

equations of state (Chap 4) They are often used in composition-dependent mixingrules for the parameters to describe mixtures (Chap 5)

As a result, we first study methods for obtaining pure component constants of

the more commonly used properties and show how they can be estimated if noexperimental data are available These include the vapor-liquid critical properties,atmospheric boiling and freezing temperatures and dipole moments Others such asthe liquid molar volume and heat capacities are discussed in later chapters Valuesfor these properties for many substances are tabulated in Appendix A; we compare

as many of them as possible to the results from estimation methods Though theorigins of current group contribution methods are over 50 years old, previous edi-tions show that the number of techniques were limited until recently when com-putational capability allowed more methods to appear We examine most of thecurrent techniques and refer readers to earlier editions for the older methods

In Secs 2-2 (critical properties), 2-3 (acentric factor) and 2-4 (melting and ing points), we illustrate several methods and compare each with the data tabulated

boil-in Appendix A and with each other All of the calculations have been done withspreadsheets to maximize accuracy and consistency among the methods It wasfound that setting up the template and comparing calculations with as many sub-stances as possible in Appendix A demonstrated the level of complexity of themethods Finally, because many of the methods are for multiple properties andrecent developments are using alternative approaches to traditional group contri-butions, Sec 2-5 is a general discussion about choosing the best approach for purecomponent constants Finally, dipole moments are treated in Sec 2-6

Most of the estimation methods presented in this chapter are of the group, bond,

or atom contribution type That is, the properties of a molecule are usually

estab-lished from contributions from its elements The conceptual basis is that the molecular forces that determine the constants of interest depend mostly on thebonds between the atoms of the molecules The elemental contributions are prin-

inter-Copyright © 2001, 1987, 1977, 1966, 1958 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc

Click here for terms of use

cipally determined by the nature of the atoms involved (atom contributions), the bonds between pairs of atoms (bond contributions or equivalently group interaction

contributions), or the bonds within and among small groups of atoms (group tributions) They all assume that the elements can be treated independently of their

con-arrangements or their neighbors If this is not accurate enough, corrections forspecific multigroup, conformational or resonance effects can be included Thus,

there can be levels of contributions The identity of the elements to be considered (group, bond, or atom) are normally assumed in advance and their contributions

obtained by fitting to data Usually applications to wide varieties of species startwith saturated hydrocarbons and grow by sequentially adding different types ofbonds, rings, heteroatoms and resonance The formulations for pure componentconstants are quite similar to those of the ideal gas formation properties and heatcapacities of Chap 3; several of the group formulations described in Appendix Chave been applied to both types of properties

Alternatives to group / bond / atom contribution methods have recently appeared.

Most are based on adding weighted contributions of measured properties such as

molecular weight and normal boiling point, etc (factor analysis) or from

‘‘quan-titative structure-property relationships’’ (QSPR) based on contributions from lecular properties such as electron or local charge densities, molecular surface area,

mo-etc (molecular descriptors) Grigoras (1990), Horvath (1992), Katritzky, et al.

(1995; 1999), Jurs [Egolf, et al., 1994], Turner, et al (1998), and St Cholakov, et

al (1999) all describe the concepts and procedures The descriptor values are puted from molecular mechanics or quantum mechanical descriptions of the sub-stance of interest and then property values are calculated as a sum of contributionsfrom the descriptors The significant descriptors and their weighting factors arefound by sophisticated regression techniques This means, however, that there are

com-no tabulations of molecular descriptor properties for substances Rather, a molecularstructure is posed, the descriptors for it are computed and these are combined inthe correlation We have not been able to do any computations for these methodsourselves However, in addition to quoting the results from the literature, since sometabulate their estimated pure component constants, we compare them with the val-ues in Appendix A

The methods given here are not suitable for pseudocomponent properties such

as for the poorly characterized mixtures often encountered with petroleum, coal andnatural products These are usually based on measured properties such as averagemolecular weight, boiling point, and the specific gravity (at 20⬚C) rather than mo-lecular structure We do not treat such systems here, but the reader is referred tothe work of Tsonopoulos, et al (1986), Twu (1984, Twu and Coon, 1996), andJianzhong, et al (1998) for example Older methods include those of Lin and Chao(1984) and Brule, et al (1982), Riazi and Daubert (1980) and Wilson, et al (1981)

2-2 VAPOR-LIQUID CRITICAL PROPERTIES

Vapor-liquid critical temperature, T c , pressure, P c , and volume, V c, are the component constants of greatest interest They are used in many correspondingstates correlations for volumetric (Chap 4), thermodynamic (Chaps 5–8), andtransport (Chaps 9 to 11) properties of gases and liquids Experimental determi-nation of their values can be challenging [Ambrose and Young, 1995], especiallyfor larger components that can chemically degrade at their very high critical tem-

pure-PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.3

peratures [Teja and Anselme, 1990] Appendix A contains a data base of propertiesfor all the substances for which there is an evaluated critical temperature tabulated

by the Thermodynamics Research Center at Texas A&M University [TRC, 1999]plus some evaluated values by Ambrose and colleagues and by Steele and col-leagues under the sponsorship of the Design Institute for Physical Properties Re-search (DIPPR) of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) in New

methods

Estimation Techniques

One of the first successful group contribution methods to estimate critical properties

was developed by Lydersen (1955) Since that time, more experimental values havebeen reported and efficient statistical techniques have been developed that allowdetermination of alternative group contributions and optimized parameters We ex-amine in detail the methods of Joback (1984; 1987), Constantinou and Gani (1994),Wilson and Jasperson (1996), and Marrero and Pardillo (1999) After each is de-scribed and its accuracy discussed, comparisons are made among the methods,including descriptor approaches, and recommendations are made Earlier methodssuch as those of Lyderson (1955), Ambrose (1978; 1979; 1980), and Fedors (1982)are described in previous editions; they do not appear to be as accurate as thoseevaluated here

Method of Joback. Joback (1984; 1987) reevaluated Lydersen’s group

contribu-tion scheme, added several new funccontribu-tional groups, and determined new contribucontribu-tion

values His relations for the critical properties are

where the contributions are indicated as tck, pck and v ck The group identities and

Joback’s values for contributions to the critical properties are in Table C-1 For T c,

or by estimation from methods given in Sec 2-4; we compare the results for both

An example of the use of Joback’s groups is Example 2-1; previous editions giveother examples, as do Devotta and Pendyala (1992)

Example 2-1 Estimate T c , P c , and V c for 2-ethylphenol by using Joback’s group method.

ACOH (phenol) and two ⫽C(ds) Note that the group ACOH is only for the OH and does not include the aromatic carbon From Appendix Table C-1

bar An experimental V cis not available Thus the differences are

T Difference (Exp T ) c b ⫽ 703 ⫺ 698.1 ⫽ 4.9 K or 0.7%

T Difference (Est T ) c b ⫽ 703 ⫺ 715.7 ⫽ ⫺12.7 K or ⫺1.8%

P Difference c ⫽ 43.00 ⫺ 44.09 ⫽ ⫺1.09 bar or ⫺2.5%.

A summary of the comparisons between estimations from the Joback method

and experimental Appendix A values for T c , P c , and V cis shown in Table 2-1 Theresults indicate that the Joback method for critical properties is quite reliable for

T c of all substances regardless of size if the experimental T bis used When estimated

values of T bare used, there is a significant increase in error, though it is less forcompounds with 3 or more carbons (2.4% average increase for entries indicated by

bin the table, compared to 3.8% for the whole database indicated bya)

For P c, the reliability is less, especially for smaller substances (note the ence between the aandbentries) The largest errors are for the largest molecules,especially fluorinated species, some ring compounds, and organic acids Estimates

differ-can be either too high or too low; there is no obvious pattern to the errors For V c,the average error is several percent; for larger substances the estimated values areusually too small while estimated values for halogenated substances are often toolarge There are no obvious simple improvements to the method Abildskov (1994)did a limited examination of Joback predictions (less than 100 substances) andfound similar absolute percent errors to those of Table 2-1

A discussion comparing the Joback technique with other methods for criticalproperties is presented below and a more general discussion of group contributionmethods is in Sec 2-5

Method of Constantinou and Gani (CG). Constantinou and Gani (1994)

devel-oped an advanced group contribution method based on the UNIFAC groups (see

Chap 8) but they allow for more sophisticated functions of the desired properties

PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.5

TABLE 2-1 Summary of Comparisons of Joback Method with Appendix A Database Property # Substances AAEc A%Ec # Err ⬎ 10%d # Err ⬍ 5%e

aThe number of substances in Appendix A with data that could be tested with the method.

bThe number of substances in Appendix A having 3 or more carbon atoms with data that could be tested with the method.

cAAE is average absolute error in the property; A%E is average absolute percent error.

dThe number of substances for which the absolute percent error was greater than 10%.

eThe number of substances for which the absolute percent error was less than 5% The number of substances with errors between 5% and 10% can be determined from the table information.

ƒThe experimental value of T bin Appendix A was used.

g The value of T bused was estimated by Joback’s method (see Sec 2-4).

and also for contributions at a ‘‘Second Order’’ level The functions give moreflexibility to the correlation while the Second Order partially overcomes the limi-tation of UNIFAC which cannot distinguish special configurations such as isomers,multiple groups located close together, resonance structures, etc., at the ‘‘First Or-

der.’’ The general CG formulation of a function ƒ[F] of a property F is

F⫽ƒ冋 冘N (F ) k 1k ⫹W冘M (F ) j 2j册 (2-2.4)

number of First-Order groups of type k in the molecule; F 1kis the contribution for

Second-Order group labeled 2j to the specified property, F The value of W is set

to zero for First-Order calculations and set to unity for Second-order calculations.For the critical properties, the CG formulations are

Example 2-2 Estimate T c , P c , and V cfor 2-ethylphenol by using Constantinou and Gani’s group method.

solution The First-Order groups for 2-ethylphenol are one CH 3 , four ACH, one ACCH2, and one ACOH There are no Second-Order groups (even though the ortho proximity effect might suggest it) so the First Order and Second Order calculations are the same From Appendix Tables C-2 and C-3

The Appendix A values for the critical temperature and pressure are 703.0 K and 43.0

bar An experimental V cis not available Thus the differences are

2-propanol 2-butanol

PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.7

Property/Butanol 1-butanol

1-propanol

2-propanol 2-butanol

2-methyl-T c, K

Calculated (First Order) 558.91 548.06 539.37 548.06 Abs percent Err (First Order) 0.74 0.05 6.55 2.24 Calculated (Second Order) 558.91 543.31 497.46 521.57 Abs percent Err (Second Order) 0.74 0.82 1.73 2.70

P c, bar

Calculated (First Order) 41.97 41.91 43.17 41.91 Abs percent Err (First Order) 5.11 2.52 8.65 0.30 Calculated (Second Order) 41.97 41.66 42.32 44.28 Abs percent Err (Second Order) 5.11 3.11 6.53 5.96

V c, cm 3 mol⫺1

Calculated (First Order) 276.9 272.0 259.4 272.0 Abs percent Err (First Order) 0.71 0.37 5.67 1.11 Calculated (Second Order) 276.9 276.0 280.2 264.2 Abs percent Err (Second Order) 0.71 1.10 1.90 1.78

The First Order results are generally good except for 2-methyl-2-propanol

(t-butanol) The steric effects of its crowded methyl groups make its experimental value quite different from the others; most of this is taken into account by the First-Order groups, but the Second Order contribution is significant Notice that the Second Order contributions for the other species are small and may change the results in the wrong direction so that the Second Order estimate can be slightly worse than the First Order estimate This problem occurs often, but its effect is normally small; including Second Order effects usually helps and rarely hurts much.

A summary of the comparisons between estimations from the Constantinou and

Gani method and experimental values from Appendix A for T c , P c , and V cis shown

in Table 2-2

The information in Table 2-2 indicates that the Constantinou / Gani method can

be quite reliable for all critical properties, though there can be significant errors forsome smaller substances as indicated by the lower errors in Table 2-2B compared

to Table 2-2A for T c and P c but not for V c This occurs because group additivity isnot so accurate for small molecules even though it may be possible to form themfrom available groups In general, the largest errors of the CG method are for thevery smallest and for the very largest molecules, especially fluorinated and largerring compounds Estimates can be either too high or too low; there is no obviouspattern to the errors

Constantinou and Gani’s original article (1994) described tests for 250 to 300substances Their average absolute errors were significantly less than those of Table

Order and 4.8 K for Second Order estimations compared to 18.5K and 17.7 K here

Abildskov (1994) made a limited study of the Constantinou / Gani method (less than

100 substances) and found absolute and percent errors very similar to those of Table2-2 Such differences typically arise from different selections of the substances anddata base values In most cases, including Second Order contributions improved the

TABLE 2-2 Summary of Constantinou / Gani Method Compared to Appendix A Data Base

A All substances in Appendix A with data that could be tested with the method

Property T c, K P c, bar V c, cm 3 mol ⫺1

eThe number of substances for which Second-Order groups are fined for the property.

de-fThe number of substances for which the Second Order result is more accurate than First Order.

gThe average improvement of Second Order compared to First Order.

A negative value indicates that overall the Second Order was less rate.

accu-PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.9

results 1 to 3 times as often as it degraded them, but except for ring compoundsand olefins, the changes were rarely more than 1 to 2% Thus, Second Order con-tributions make marginal improvements overall and it may be worthwhile to includethe extra complexity only for some individual substances In practice, examiningthe magnitude of the Second Order values for the groups involved should provide

a user with the basis for including them or not

A discussion comparing the Constantinou / Gani technique with other methodsfor critical properties is presented below and a more general discussion is found inSec 2-5

Method of Wilson and Jasperson. Wilson and Jasperson (1996) reported three

Zero-Order method uses factor analysis with boiling point, liquid density and molecular weight as the descriptors At the First Order, the method uses atomic contributions

along with boiling point and number of rings, while the Second Order method also

includes group contributions The Zero-Order has not been tested here; it is iterative

and the authors report that it is less accurate by as much as a factor of two or three

the following equations:

type k with First Order atomic contributions⌬tck and⌬pck while M jis the number

of the contributions are given in Table 2-3 both for the First Order Atomic

Con-tributions and for the Second-Order Group ConCon-tributions Note that T c requires T b.Application of the Wilson and Jasperson method is shown in Example 2-4

Example 2-4 Estimate T c and P cfor 2-ethylphenol by using Wilson and Jasperson’s method.

solution The atoms of 2-ethylphenol are 8 ⫺C, 10 ⫺H, 1 ⫺O and there is 1 ring For groups, there is 1⫺OH for ‘‘C5 or more.’’ The value of T bfrom Appendix A is 477.67 K; the value estimated by the Second Order method of Constantinou and Gani (Eq 2-4.4) is 489.24 K From Table 2-3A

TABLE 2-3A Wilson-Jasperson (1996) Atomic Contributions for Eqs (2-2.8) and (2-2.9)

PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.11

TABLE 2-3B Wilson-Jasperson (1996) Group

Contributions for Eqs (2-2.8) and (2-2.9)

0.2

T c⫽ 477.67/[0.048271 ⫺ 0.019846 ⫹ 0.11653 ⫹ 0.01] ⫽ 693.6 K

If the estimated value of T bis used, the result is 710.9 K The Appendix A values for the critical properties are 703.0 K and 43.0 bar, respectively Thus the differences are

First Order T (Exp T ) c b Difference ⫽ 703.0 ⫺ 702.9 ⫽ 0.1 K or 0.0%

T (Est T ) c b Difference ⫽ 703.0 ⫺ 719.9 ⫽ ⫺16.9 K or ⫺2.4%

P c Difference ⫽ 43.0 ⫺ 37.9 ⫽ 5.1 bar or 11.9%.

Second Order T (Exp T ) c b Difference ⫽ 703.0 ⫺ 693.6 ⫽ 9.4 K or 1.3%

T (Est T ) c b Difference ⫽ 703.0 ⫺ 710.9 ⫽ ⫺7.9 K or ⫺1.1%

P ( c ⫽ First Order) Difference ⫽ 43.0 ⫺ 37.9 ⫽ 5.1 bar or 11.9%.

The First Order estimate for T cis more accurate than the Second Order estimate which occasionally occurs.

A summary of the comparisons between estimations from the Wilson and

in Table 2-4 Unlike the Joback and Constantinou / Gani method, there was no

dis-TABLE 2-4 Summary of Wilson / Jasperson Method Compared to Appendix A Data Base

Ave ⌬% First to Second Orderg 0.5 ⫺1.8 8.6 7.9

* Eq (2-2.8) with experimental T b.

⫹Eq (2-2.8) with T bestimated from Second Order Method of Constantinou and Gani (1994).

# Eq (2-2.9) with experimental T c.

@ Eq (2-2.9) with T c estimated using Eq (2-2.8) and experimental T b.

aThe number of substances in Appendix A with data that could be tested with the method.

bAAE is average absolute error in the property; A%E is average absolute percent error.

cThe number of substances for which the absolute percent error was greater than 10%.

dThe number of substances for which the absolute percent error was less than 5% The number of substances with errors between 5% and 10% can be determined from the table information.

eThe number of substances for which Second-Order groups are defined for the property.

ƒ The number of substances for which the Second Order result is more accurate than First Order.

gThe average improvement of Second Order compared to First Order A negative value indicates that overall the Second Order was less accurate.

cernible difference in errors between small and large molecules for either property

so only the overall is given

The information in Table 2-4 indicates that the Wilson / Jasperson method is very

normally make significant improvements over estimates from the First Order atom

contributions The accuracy for P cdeteriorates only slightly with an estimated value

of T c if the experimental T b is used The accuracy of T cis somewhat less when the

(1994) (Eq 2-4.4) Thus the method is remarkable in its accuracy even though it

is the simplest of those considered here and applies to all sizes of substancesequally

Wilson and Jasperson compared their method with results for 700 compounds

of all kinds including 172 inorganic gases, liquids and solids, silanes and siloxanes.Their reported average percent errors for organic substance were close to thosefound here while they were somewhat larger for the nonorganics The errors fororganic acids and nitriles are about twice those for the rest of the substances.Nielsen (1998) studied the method and found similar results

Discussion comparing the Wilson / Jasperson technique with other methods forcritical properties is presented below and a more general discussion is in Sec 2-5

Method of Marrero and Pardillo. Marrero-Marejo´n and Pardillo-Fontdevila

contribution technique or what is effectively a bond contribution method They give

PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.13

with hydrogen attached, such as CH3— & —NH2 Their basic equations are

Values of contributions for the 167 pairs of groups (bonds) are given in Table2-5 These were obtained directly from Dr Marrero and correct some misprints inthe original article (1999) The notation of the table is such that when an atom is

that the group is in a ring such as in aromatics and naphthenics, and [rr] means thepair connects 2 rings as in biphenyl or terphenyl Thus, the pair⬎C⬍& F—meansthat the C is bonded to 4 atoms / groups that are not hydrogen and one of the bonds

atom and has 2 single bonds with 1 of the bonds being to F Bonding by multiple

would have 1 pair of [⫽]CH— & [⫽]C⬍, 1 pair of⫽CH— & F—, 1 pair of

C⬍& —F, 1 pair of C⬍and⬎C⬍, and 3 pairs of⬎C⬍& —F The location

of bonding in esters is distinguished by the use of [ ] as in pairs 20, 21, 67, 100

it differs from other methods considered in this section because it places single anddouble bonds in the rings at specific locations, affecting the choice of contributions.This method of treating chemical structure is the same as used in traditional Hand-books of Chemistry such as Lange’s (1999) We illustrate the placement of sidegroups and bonds with 1-methylnaphthalene in Example 2-5 The locations of thedouble bonds for pairs 130, 131, and 139 must be those illustrated as are the singlebonds for pairs 133, 134 and 141 The positions of side groups must also be care-fully done; the methyl group with bond pair 10 must be placed at the ‘‘top’’ of thediagram since it must be connected to the 131 and 141 pairs If the location of it

or of the double bond were changed, the contributions would change

Example 2-5 List the pairs of groups (bonds) of the Marrero / Pardillo (1999) method for 1-methylnaphthalene.

solution The molecular structure and pair numbers associated with the bonds from Table 2-5 are shown in the diagram.

TABLE 2-5 Marrero-Pardillo (1999) Contributions for Eqs (2-2.10) to (2-2.12) and (2-4.5) Pair # Atom / Group Pairs tcbk pcbk vcbk tbbk

PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.15

TABLE 2-5 Marrero-Pardillo (1999) Contributions for Eqs (2-2.10) to (2-2.12) and (2-4.5)

TABLE 2-5 Marrero-Pardillo (1999) Contributions for Eqs (2-2.10) to (2-2.12) and (2-4.5)

PURE COMPONENT CONSTANTS 2.17

TABLE 2-5 Marrero-Pardillo (1999) Contributions for Eqs (2-2.10) to (2-2.12) and (2-4.5)

133 130

130 139

141

134

134

Pair # 10 130 131 133 134 139 141

Atom / Group Pair CH3— & ⫽ C⬍ [r]

—CH[ ⫽ ] [r] & —CH[ ⫽ ] [r]

—CH[ ⫽ ] [r] & ⬎C[ ] [r] ⫽ CH— [r] & CH— [r]

Other applications of the Marrero and Pardillo method are shown in Examples2-6 and 2-7 There are also several informative examples in the original paper(1999)

Example 2-6 Estimate T c , P c , and V cfor 2-ethylphenol by using Marrero and Pardillo’s method.

solution The chemical structure to be used is shown The locations of the various

bond pairs are indicated on the structure shown The value of Natoms is 19.

—

N k tck

⫺ 0.0227 0.1012

⫺ 0.2246

⫺ 0.7172 0.4178 0.2318 0.0931

⫺ 0.1206

N k pck

⫺ 0.0430

⫺ 0.0626 0.1542 0.2980

The estimates from Eqs (2-2.10) to (2-2.12) are

bar An experimental V cis not available Thus the differences are

T c Difference ⫽ 703.0 ⫺ 699.8 ⫽ 3.2 K or 0.5%

P c Difference ⫽ 43.0 ⫺ 42.2 ⫽ 0.8 bar or 1.8%

If Marrero and Pardillo’s recommended method for estimating T bis used (Eq 2-4.5),

the result for T c is 700.6, an error of 0.3% which is more accurate than with the

experimental T b.

Example 2-7 Estimate T c , P c , and V cfor the four butanols using Marrero and Pardillo’s method.

solution The Atom / Group Pairs for the butanols are:

Pair # Atom / Group Pair 1-butanol

1-propanol

2-propanol 2-butanol

2-propanol 2-butanol

a Calculated with Eq [2-2.10] using T bfrom Appendix A.

b Calculated with Eq [2-2.10] using T estimated with Marrero / Pardillo method Eq (2-4.5).