Pressure and Temperature Dependence of Self-Diffusion in Liquid Linear Hydrocarbons
Pressure and Temperature Dependence of Self-Diffusion in Liquid Linear Hydrocarbons
Pressure and Temperature Dependence of Self-Diffusion in Liquid Linear Hydrocarbons
0340-4811 / 86 / 0700-0963 $ 01.30/0. - Please order a reprint rather than m aking your own copy.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
964 F. Bachl and H.-D. Liidemann • Pressure and Temperature D ependence o f Self-D iffusion
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
Pentane Hexane Decane
347K
2UK
174 K
d0
10 —f— —r~ —r~
0 50 100 "l5Ö" Wo 0 50 100 150 ~20Ö 0 50 "ioö" 150 200
p (MPa) p (MPa) p (MPa)
Fig. 2. Isotherms o f the self diffusion coefficients o f fluid n-pentane, n-hexane and n-decane.
Fig. 3. Isotherms o f the self diffusion coefficients o f fluid 2-butyne, c-2-butene, and t-2-butene.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
966 F. Bachl and H.-D. Lüdemann • Pressure and Temperature D ependence o f Self-Diffusion
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
F. Bachl and H.-D. Lüdemann • Pressure and Temperature D ependence o f Self-D iffusion 967
kT 1/2
Dn = (3)
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
968 F. Bachl and H.-D. Lüdemann • Pressure and Temperature D ependence o f Self-Diffusion
diffusion coefficients in real, polyatomic liquids. Table 2. Comparison o f the molar volum es V0 calculated
The experim ental diffusion coefficient Z)exp should by application o f the RHS model with the same quantity
calculated from melting point densities.
thus correspond to the diffusion coefficient o f a
rough hard sphere Z)RHS given by Molar volum e Substance
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
F. Bachl and H.-D. Lüdemann • Pressure and Temperature D ependence o f Self-D iffusion 969
Table 3. Comparison o f the self diffusion coefficients simulations by W. J. Jorgensen et al. [38], The
obtained experimentally and by M D sim ulations.
dynam ic properties of butane as functions of
pressure and tem perature where calculated with
T P
m olecular dynamics sim ulations by W eber [39]
using a simplified skeleton alkane model and a
(K) (MPa) ^MD ^cxp
sim plified Lennard-Jones 6 - 9 interaction potential.
n-Butane 397.83 4.2 4.91 * 2.5 Ryckaert et al. [40. 41] used a sim ilar approach
406.04 15.42 3.36 * 1.52 applying a 6 - 1 2 Lennard-Jones potential to derive
314.86 8.97 1.74* 0.76
416.42 39.61 2.19* 1.26 the therm o dynam ic and dynam ic beh aviour o f
407.27 101.96 1.50* 0.78 liquid n-butane and n-decane close to their boiling
291.5 S. P. 6.1/6.9** 6.7
points at atm ospheric pressure. Table 3 compares
199.9 S.P. 2.1/2.4** 1.97
their calculated self diffusion coefficients with our
n-Decane 481 S.P. 7.5/7.7** 7.6
interpolated experimental results.
* Weber. Ref. [39]. - ** Ryckaert, Ref. [40, 41], While the Ryckaert’s results agree with our data
w ithin the limits of experimental error, W e b e r’s
Inspection o f the Figs. 8 and especially 9 reveals treatm ent yields self diffusion coefficients that are
clearly that the interpolation o f D for unknow n approxim ately a factor of two larger than our
homologues could only be achieved with some results. Considering the similarity of the two co m
degree of reliability if a theoretical concept for the putational approaches this large difference is sur
tem perature dependence o f the ^ -p a ra m e te r would prising. However, one should check experim entally
be available. The present state o f the art makes various other properties before any attem pt is m ade
extrapolations into unknow n ranges o f the q, T- to evaluate the merits and shortcomings o f the two
space as well as interpolation o f the data to cover approaches.
unknown intermediate homologues equally h a z a r d
ous.
Acknowledgements
[1] K. R. Harris and N. J. Trappeniers, Physics A 104, [13] W. L. Jorgensen, J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 103, 4721
262 (1980). (1981).
[2] M. A. McCool and L. A. W oolf, Chem. Soc. Faradav [14] H. Yamada, Rev. Sei. Intrum. 4 5,690 (1974).
Trans. I, 6 8 , 1971 (1972). [15] J. Hauer, E. W. Lang, and H.-D. Lüdemann, Ber.
[3] F. X. Prielmeier, E. W. Lang, and H.-D. Lüdemann, Bunsenges. Phys. Chem. 8 3 , 1262 (1979).
Mol. Phys. 5 2 , 1105 (1984). [16] H. Weingärtner, Z. Phys. Chem. 132, 129 (1982).
[4] F. X. Prielmeier and H.-D. Lüdemann, Mol. Phys. (in [17] Landolt/Börnstein, 6. ed., vol. II, p a r ti, p. 632,
press). Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1971.
[5] M. H. Cohen and D. J. Turnbull, J. Chem. Phys. 31, [18] N. B. Vargaftik, Tables on the Thermophysical Prop
1164 (1959). erties o f Liquids and Gases, p. 211, Hemisphere
[6] J. H. Dymond, J. Chem. Phys. 60, 969 (1974). Publishing Corporation, W ashington-London 1975.
[7] D. Chandler. J. Chem. Phys. 62, 1358 (1975). [19] K. Raznjevic, Handbook o f Thermodynam ic Tables
[8] H. J. Böhm, R. Ahlrichs, P. Scharf, and H. Schiffer, and Charts, p. 69, Hem isphere Publishing Corpora
J. Chem. Phys. 8 1 , 1389 (1984). tion, W ashington-London 1976.
[9] H. J. Böhm, C. Meissner, and R. Ahlrichs, Mol. Phys. [20] W. M. Haynes and R. D. Goodwin, Nat. Bur. Stand.
5 3,65 1 (1984). (U S), Monogr. 169(1982).
[10] H. J. Böhm and R. Ahlrichs, Mol. Phys. 54, 1261 [21] E. T. Vas’kov, D eposited D oc., VINITI 5643 (1983).
(1985). [22] A. L. Lee and R. T. Ellington, J. Chem. Engng. Data
[11] D. Chandler and L. R. Pratt, J. Chem. Phys. 65, 2925 10,101 (1965).
(1976). [23] D. W. Brazier and G. R. Freeman, Can. J. Chem. 47,
[12] L. R. Pratt, C. S. Hsu, and D. Chandler, J. Chem. 893 (1969).
Phys. 6 8 , 4 2 0 2 ( 1 9 7 8 ) .
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM
970 F. Bachl and H.-D. Lüdemann • Pressure and Temperature D ependence o f Self-Diffusion
[24] J. C. Houck, J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand.-A., Phys. and [33] S. Chapman and T. G. Cowling, The Mathematical
Chem. 78 A, 617 (1974). Theory o f N on-U niform Gases, Cambridge Univer
[25] Yu. L. Vasil’ev, Isv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., N eft Gaz. sity Press, Cambridge 1970.
2 7,57 (1984). [34] D. Enskog, Kungl. Svenska. Vet. Ak. Handl. 63, 4
[26] H. Kratzke, S. Müller, M. Bohn, and R. Kohlen, J. (1922).
Chem. Therm odynamics 17,283 (1985). [35] B. J. Alder, D. M. Gass, and T. E. Wainwright, J.
[27] E. Kuss and M. Taslim i, Chemie-Ing.-Techn. 42 , 1073 Chem. Phys. 53,3813 (1970).
(1970). [36] N. J. Trappeniers, Adv. in Molec. Relaxation and
[28] J. H. Dym ond, K. J. Young, and J. D. Isdale, J. Chem. Interaction Processes 2 4 , 297 (1982).
Thermodynamics 11,887 (1979). [37] M. Woznyj, F. X. Prielmeier, and H.-D. Lüdemann,
[29] J. H. Dym ond, J. Robertson, and J. D. Isdale, J. Z. Naturforsch. 39 a, 800 (1984).
Chem. Thermodynamics 14,51 (1982). [38] W. L. Jorgensen, J. D. Madura, and C. J. Swenson, J.
[30] A. F. Collings and L. A. W oolf, J. Chem. Soc. Amer. Chem. Soc. 106,6638 (1984).
Faraday 1,71,2296 (1975). [39] Th. A. Weber, J. Chem. Phys. 69,2347 (1978).
[31] R. L. Hurle, A. J. Esteal, and L. A. W oolf, J. Chem. [40] J.-P. Ryckaert and A. Bellemans, Chem. Phys. Letters
Soc. Faraday Trans. I, 81,769 (1985). 30 ,1 2 3 (1975).
[32] D. J. Wilbur, J. D e Fries, and J. Jonas, J. Chem. Phys. [41] J.-P. Ryckaert and A. Bellemans, Faraday Discuss.
65, 1783 (1976). Chem. Soc. 6 6 ,9 5 (1978).
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 7/12/19 5:43 AM