2
$\begingroup$

Please, before closing this question as off-topic, consider that this is completely a calculus problem, no chemistry involved


Dieterci's real gas equation is $$p = {RTe^{-a/(RTV)}\over V - b}$$

I need to find critical constants of this equation.

To do that I need to equation first second derivative of this equation to 0. and find the expression for $V$ and $T$ from them in terms of $a, b$. And then put those values in real equation to obtain a expression for $p$ in terms of $a, b$.

So differentiating the formula with respect to V,

$$p^\prime = RT\left[(e^{-a/(RTV)})^\prime (V -b)^{-1} + (-1)(1)(V -b)^{-2}e^{-a/(RTV)} \right] \tag{1}$$ $$p^\prime = -RTe^{-a/(RTV)}\left[ {a\over RT}(V^{-2})(V -b)^{-1} + (V - b)^{-2} \right] \tag{2}$$ $$p^\prime = -RTe^{-a/(RTV)}(V -b)^{-1}\left[ {a\over RT}(V^{-2}) + (V - b)^{-1} \right] \tag{3}$$ $$\bbox[5px,Border:2px solid black]{p^\prime = -p\left[ {a\over RT}(V^{-2}) + (V - b)^{-1} \right]} \tag{4}$$

And differentiating it again w.r.t to V

$$\bbox[5px,Border:2px solid black]{p^{\prime\prime} = p^\prime\left({a\over RT}(V^{-2} - (V - b)^{-1})\right) + \left[ {a \over RT}(-2)V^{-3} + (V- b)^{-2} \right]p} \tag {5}$$

Now equating $(5)$ and $(4)$ to zero I get,

For $(4)$ $$p^\prime = -p\left[ {a\over RT}(V^{-2}) + (V - b)^{-1} \right] = 0$$ $$\left[ {a\over RT}(V^{-2}) + (V - b)^{-1} \right] = 0$$ $$RTV^2 - aV + ab = 0 \tag{6}$$

For $(5)$ Since we know $p^\prime = 0$

$$0 = \left[ {a \over RT}(-2)V^{-3} + (V- b)^{-2} \right]p$$ $${a\over RTV^3} = \frac1{V^2 + b^2 -2Vb}$$ $${ RTV^3\over a} = {V^2 + b^2 -2Vb} \tag {7}$$

Now to get the critical constants I need to solve for $V$ and $T$ in equations $(6)$ and $(7)$. I tried it but I ended up in a mess.

I need help as to how to solve these equations conviently. Thanks.

  • 0
    You can reduce it to a quadratic equation if you substitute for $RTV^2$ in (7) using (6). Then $T$ can be found by rearranging (6).2017-01-06
  • 0
    @Chappers Wait I will try and tell. Is everything else correct in my post,.2017-01-06
  • 0
    Is it + or - in the exponential?2017-01-06
  • 0
    @Chappers it is -ve in the exponential.2017-01-06
  • 0
    @Chappers Corrected the equation.2017-01-06
  • 0
    In which case, I think (4) has an overall $-$?2017-01-06
  • 0
    @Chappers yes you are correct.2017-01-06
  • 0
    Yes, I think you're correct if you fix the signs: remember that $(1/V)' = -1/V^2$ and $(1/V^2)'= -2/V^3$.2017-01-06
  • 0
    @Chappers Thank you very much.2017-01-06
  • 0
    Multiply (6) by $\frac{V}{a}$ and compare with (7). The solution almost falls out directly. However this gives $V=b$ and $T=0$ so I suspect these equations are not correct. If I do it from scratch I get $V = 2b$ and $T = \frac{a}{4bR}$ so I would check the algebra here.2017-01-06
  • 0
    There is a sign error in (4); the $V^{-2}$ term should have a minus in front. To simplify the analysis here it's useful to define dimensionless variables so that you don't have to carry around all the constants. If we define $\hat{V} = \frac{V}{b}$ and $\hat{T} = \frac{bRT}{a}$ then $p(\hat{V},\hat{T}) = k \cdot {e^{-\frac{1}{\hat{T} \hat{V}}}\over \hat{V} - 1}$ where $k = \frac{a \hat{T}}{b^2}$. Now you can compute and solve $\frac{\partial p}{\partial \hat{V}} = 0$ and $\frac{\partial^2 p}{\partial \hat{V}^2} = 0$. Once you found the solution you can translate back to $(T,V)$.2017-01-06
  • 0
    @Winther Thank you very much.2017-01-07

2 Answers 2

4

This is too long for a comment.

You could have done the first steps faster using logarithmic differentiation $$P = {RT\over V - b}e^{-\frac a {RTV}}\implies \log(P)=\log(RT)-\log(V-b)-\frac a {RTV}$$ So, differentiate to get $$\frac{P'}{P}=\frac{a}{R T V^2}-\frac{1}{V-b}\implies P'=P\left(\frac{a}{R T V^2}-\frac{1}{V-b} \right)\tag 1$$ Differentiate a second time $$P''=P'\left(\frac{a}{R T V^2}-\frac{1}{V-b} \right)+P\left(\frac{a}{R T V^2}-\frac{1}{V-b} \right)'\tag 2$$ and since you will impose later $P'=P''=0$, the equations are $$\frac{a}{R T V^2}-\frac{1}{V-b}=0\tag 3$$ $$\left(\frac{a}{R T V^2}-\frac{1}{V-b} \right)'=\frac{1}{(V-b)^2}-\frac{2 a}{R T V^3}=0\tag 4$$ So $$\frac{1}{V-b}=\frac{a}{R T V^2}\tag 5$$ $$\frac{1}{(V-b)^2}=\frac{2 a}{R T V^3}\tag 6$$ Squaring $(5)$ and computing the ratio to $(6)$ leads to $a=2RTV$; using this result in $(5)$ gives$$\frac {1}{V-b}=\frac{2RTV}{RTV^2}=\frac 2 V\implies V=2b\implies T=\frac{a}{4 b R}$$ Back to the initial expression of $P$, the above give $$P=\frac{a}{4 e^2 b^2}$$ So, as functions of parameters $a,b$, the critical coordinates of Dieterici equation of state are given by $$V_c=2b \qquad T_c=\frac{a}{4 b R} \qquad P_c=\frac{a}{4 e^2 b^2}\qquad Z_c=\frac{P_cV_c}{RT_c}=\frac{2}{e^2}$$

In practice, in this domain of equations of state, since, for components, critical properties are known, we use to compute the $a,b$ parameters from $T_c,P_c$ $$a=\frac{4 R^2 T_c^2}{e^2 P_c}\qquad b=\frac{R T_c}{e^2 P_c}$$

  • 0
    ...and to anticipate possible further questions: usually, the critical pressure and temperature are more accurately known than the critical volume, so conventionally the two Dieterici parameters are computed from $P_c$ and $T_c$. There are, however, approaches like least-squares that can also incorporate information from $V_c$.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @J.M.isn'tamathematician. If I may object, it is not for this reason. The problem is that, with two-parameter equations of state, we have three conditions and two unknowns $(a,b)$; this the leads to a universal compressibility factor $Z_c$. We could compute the parameters from any combination $( T_c,P_c)$, $( T_c,V_c)$, $( P_c,V_c)$. The "best" critical isotherm is obtained using $( T_c,P_c)$ for generating the parameters. Just experience that with Van der Waals equation of state applied to nitrogen or methane.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @J.M.isn'tamathematician. If I may ask : how you interested by equations of state ? I would enjoy discussing this topic and the mathematics around.2017-01-07
  • 0
    "we have three conditions and two unknowns" - right, that's why I brought up the "least-squares" approach I've seen in some of the literature, where the sum of squares of differences between the true critical constants and the EOS's estimates is minimized with respect to $a,b$. I don't think we disagree; I did say that the $P_c$ and $T_c$ are more precisely known, so that $a,b$ is conventionally derived from them.2017-01-07
  • 0
    (P. S. I'm a chemist; I've been doing research on this on and off, and I'm actually looking into some advanced stuff at the moment, working off the classical *Molecular Theory of Gases and Liquids* by Hirschfelder, Curtiss, and Bird. If you wish to discuss this with me further off-site, my (encoded) e-mail address is in my profile.)2017-01-07
  • 0
    @ClaudeLeibovici Since you say you are interested in equation of states, I want to ask Why we have so many equations of states ? and is $a$ and $b$ represent samething in all the equation of states ?2017-01-07
  • 0
    @A--B, we have a lot of these EOSs since as of yet we haven't found a (simple!) one that accurately captures the true behavior of a fluid for all possible conditions. For instance, Redlich-Kwong tends to perform better than Dieterici at high ($T>T_c$) temperatures, while it is the other way around at low temperatures. (It is possible I'm out-of-date and somebody already found the Holy Grail while I wasn't looking.)2017-01-07
  • 0
    In general, the $a,b$ pair of one EOS does not necessarily have an exact correspondence with the EOS of another. We have the rough intuition of $b$ being the "molecular repulsion" parameter and $a$ being the "attraction" parameter, but that's about it.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @J.M.isn'tamathematician So that means we use different gas equation at different temperatures, never thought about that. I just love physical chemistry, I think it just sits in middle of maths, chemistry and physics. Sadly my current course does not include much of it.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @A---B. To say that I am interested in equation of states would be an understatement. I already spent more than 50 years working them in oil & gas industry and I am still doing research in this area. May be you could look at my papers in *Fluid Phase Equilibria* if this is of any interest to you. If you want, we could later have a discussion about any of your concerns in this area. Let me know. Cheers.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @A---B, "we use different gas equation at different temperatures" - and different pressures, and sometimes we use different things depending on whether the substance is polar or nonpolar, etc. In short: a lot of what we currently have work well over either a small domain of conditions or only for a particular set of fluids, but we do not (apparently) yet have a panacea.2017-01-07
  • 0
    ClaudeLeibovici I would love to have a discussion in that area with you and @J.M, maybe we could create a chat on MSE , but I don't think I have knowledge to do so. You and he have worked on this area for many years and it is barely 5 months since I learned something called EOS.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @J.M.isn'tamathematician. With regard to your comment :Dieterici EoS suffers the same problem as Clausius EoS. If you rewrite as $$P = {RT\over V - b}e^{-\frac {a f(Tr)} {RV}}$$ and define $f(Tr)$ such that the vapor pressure is exactly matched (same spirit as Soave), you have something which is much better.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @A---B. Any time you want, we go to chat room. Just open one and tell me. If you are interested by the topic, the fact that you are young in this area does not matter. Cheers.2017-01-07
  • 0
    Yes, Soave/Peng/Robinson type corrections that account for acentricity improve matters, but then one now has to determine an additional parameter.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @J.M.isn'tamathematician. Not at all : the vapor pressure curve is a physical property of the component. So, compute, for a given component, $f(Tr)$. Relations to the acentric factor is a shortcut which is stupid (to me). You can do much, much better.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @J.M.isn'tamathematician. I cannot get your e-maila address (I am almost blind). Mine is in my profile. So, if you wish, contact me at any time. Cheers.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @ClaudeLeibovici Thanks. You can tell the day of week when you are free and I will create a chat.2017-01-07
  • 0
    @A---B. Why not today ? I am at the office (4:00am here in France). I shal stay up to 12:00am and be back around 2:00pm (up to 5:00pm).2017-01-08
  • 0
    @ClaudeLeibovici http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/51397/chat-room-for-basic-physical-chemistry-talk . You can join here.2017-01-08
  • 0
    @A---B. I am really so sorry for my delay. I am in the room and I shall wait for you. If not today, I shall be available tomorrow from 6:00am to 12:00am (French time).2017-01-08
1

I was reviewing my past documents, and found that first derivative should be

$$p^\prime = e^{-a/(RTV)}\left[-{RT\over(V-b)^{2}}+{a\over(V-b)V^{2}} \right] $$

Can you find second derivative?