Activity coefficient solution

It is strictly for convenience that certain conventions have been adopted in the choice of a standard-state fugacity. These conventions, in turn, result from two important considerations (a) the necessity for an unambiguous thermodynamic treatment of noncondensable components in liquid solutions, and (b) the relation between activity coefficients given by the Gibbs-Duhem equation. The first of these considerations leads to a normalization for activity coefficients for nonoondensable components which is different from that used for condensable components, and the second leads to the definition and use of adjusted or pressure-independent activity coefficients. These considerations and their consequences are discussed in the following paragraphs. 

For such components, as the composition of the solution approaches that of the pure liquid, the fugacity becomes equal to the mole fraction multiplied by the standard-state fugacity. In this case,the standard-state fugacity for component i is the fugacity of pure liquid i at system temperature T. In many cases all the components in a liquid mixture are condensable and Equation (13) is therefore used for all components in this case, since all components are treated alike, the normalization of activity coefficients is said to follow the symmetric convention. ... 

In a binary liquid solution containing one noncondensable and one condensable component, it is customary to refer to the first as the solute and to the second as the solvent. Equation (13) is used for the normalization of the solvent s activity coefficient but Equation (14) is used for the solute. Since the normalizations for the two components are not the same, they are said to follow the unsymmetric convention. The standard-state fugacity of the solvent is the fugacity of the pure liquid. The standard-state fugacity of the solute is Henry s constant. 

The standard-state fugacity of any component must be evaluated at the same temperature as that of the solution, regardless of whether the symmetric or unsymmetric convention is used for activity-coefficient normalization. But what about the pressure At low pressures, the effect of pressure on the thermodynamic properties of condensed phases is negligible and under such con-... 

When a condensable solute is present, the activity coefficient of a solvent is given by Equation (15) provided that all composition variables (x, 9, and ) are taicen on an (all) solute-free basis. Composition variables 9 and 4 are automatically on a solute-free basis by setting q = q = r = 0 for every solute. 

Figure 4-11. Activity coefficients for noncondensable solutes at infinite dilution.

Table 3 shows results obtained from a five-component, isothermal flash calculation. In this system there are two condensable components (acetone and benzene) and three noncondensable components (hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and methane). Henry s constants for each of the noncondensables were obtained from Equations (18-22) the simplifying assumption for dilute solutions [Equation (17)] was also used for each of the noncondensables. Activity coefficients for both condensable components were calculated with the UNIQUAC equation. For that calculation, all liquid-phase composition variables are on a solute-free basis the only required binary parameters are those for the acetone-benzene system. While no experimental data are available for comparison, the calculated results are probably reliable because all simplifying assumptions are reasonable the... 

Debye-Hiickel theory The activity coefficient of an electrolyte depends markedly upon concentration. Jn dilute solutions, due to the Coulombic forces of attraction and repulsion, the ions tend to surround themselves with an atmosphere of oppositely charged ions. Debye and Hiickel showed that it was possible to explain the abnormal activity coefficients at least for very dilute solutions of electrolytes. 

Hydrocarbon mixtures can be assumed to be regular solutions it is thus possible to estimate the activity coefficient using a relation published by Hildebrandt (1950) ... 

The thickness of the equivalent layer of pure water t on the surface of a 3Af sodium chloride solution is about 1 A. Calculate the surface tension of this solution assuming that the surface tension of salt solutions varies linearly with concentration. Neglect activity coefficient effects. 

Derive the equation of state, that is, the relationship between t and a, of the adsorbed film for the case of a surface active electrolyte. Assume that the activity coefficient for the electrolyte is unity, that the solution is dilute enough so that surface tension is a linear function of the concentration of the electrolyte, and that the electrolyte itself (and not some hydrolyzed form) is the surface-adsorbed species. Do this for the case of a strong 1 1 electrolyte and a strong 1 3 electrolyte. 

Assume that an aqueous solute adsorbs at the mercury-water interface according to the Langmuir equation x/xm = bc/( + be), where Xm is the maximum possible amount and x/x = 0.5 at C = 0.3Af. Neglecting activity coefficient effects, estimate the value of the mercury-solution interfacial tension when C is Q.IM. The limiting molecular area of the solute is 20 A per molecule. The temperature is 25°C. 

The film pressure of a myristic acid film at 20°C is 10 dyn/cm at an area of 23 A per molecule the limiting area at high pressures can be taken as 20 A per molecule. Calculate what the film pressure should be, using Eq. IV-36 with / = 1, and what the activity coefficient of water in the interfacial solution is in terms of that model. 

The following data (for 25°C) were obtained at the pzc for the Hg-aqueous NaF interface. Estimate and plot it as a function of the mole fraction of salt in solution. In the table,/ is mean activity coefficient such that a = f m , where m is mean molality. 

It is not necessary to limit the model to idealized sites Everett [5] has extended the treatment by incorporating surface activity coefficients as corrections to N and N2. The adsorption enthalpy can be calculated from the temperature dependence of the adsorption isotherm [6]. If the solution is taken to be ideal, then... 

The situation for electrolyte solutions is more complex theory confimis the limiting expressions (originally from Debye-Htickel theory), but, because of the long-range interactions, the resulting equations are non-analytic rather than simple power series.) It is evident that electrolyte solutions are ideally dilute only at extremely low concentrations. Further details about these activity coefficients will be found in other articles. 

The Debye-Htickel limiting law predicts a square-root dependence on the ionic strength/= MTLcz of the logarithm of the mean activity coefficient (log y ), tire heat of dilution (E /VI) and the excess volume it is considered to be an exact expression for the behaviour of an electrolyte at infinite dilution. Some experimental results for the activity coefficients and heats of dilution are shown in figure A2.3.11 for aqueous solutions of NaCl and ZnSO at 25°C the results are typical of the observations for 1-1 (e.g.NaCl) and 2-2 (e.g. ZnSO ) aqueous electrolyte solutions at this temperature. 

Figure A2.4.6. Mean activity coefFicient for NaCl solution at 25 °C as a function of the concentration full curve from ((A2A61 ) dashed curve from ((A2A63 ) dot-dashed curve from (A2.4.64). The crosses denote experimental data. From [2],...

A quite different approach was adopted by Robinson and Stokes [8], who emphasized, as above, that if the solute dissociated into ions, and a total of h molecules of water are required to solvate these ions, then the real concentration of the ions should be corrected to reflect only the bulk solvent. Robinson and Stokes derive, with these ideas, the following expression for the activity coefficient ... 

That the rate profiles are close to parallel shows that the variations in rates reflect the changing concentration of nitronium ions, rather than idiosyncrasies in the behaviour of the activity coefficients of the aromatic compounds. The acidity-dependences of the activity coefficients of / -nitrotoluene, o- and -chloronitrobenzene (fig. 2.2, 2.3.2), are fairly shallow in concentrations up to about 75 %, and seem to be parallel. In more concentrated solutions the coefficients change more rapidly and it... 

Unfortunately, insufficient data make it impossible to know whether the activity coefficients of all aromatic compounds vary slightly, or whether certain compounds, or groups of compounds, show unusual behaviour. However, it seems that slight variations in relative rates might arise from these differences, and that comparisons of reactivity are less sound in relatively concentrated solutions. 

Considering first pure nitric acid as the solvent, if the concentrations of nitronium ion in the absence and presence of a stoichiometric concentration x of dinitrogen tetroxide are yo and y respectively, these will also represent the concentrations of water in the two solutions, and the concentrations of nitrate ion will be y and x- y respectively. The equilibrium law, assuming that the variation of activity coefficients is negligible, then requires that ... 

The accurate determination of relative retention volumes and Kovats indices is of great utility to the analyst, for besides being tools of identification, they can also be related to thermodynamic properties of solutions (measurements of vapor pressure and heats of vaporization on nonpolar columns) and activity coefficients on polar columns by simple relationships (179). 

The true thermodynamic equilibrium constant is a function of activity rather than concentration. The activity of a species, a, is defined as the product of its molar concentration, [A], and a solution-dependent activity coefficient, Ya. 

For gases, pure solids, pure liquids, and nonionic solutes, activity coefficients are approximately unity under most reasonable experimental conditions. For reactions involving only these species, differences between activity and concentration are negligible. Activity coefficients for ionic solutes, however, depend on the ionic composition of the solution. It is possible, using the extended Debye-Htickel theory, to calculate activity coefficients using equation 6.50... 

Several features of equation 6.50 deserve mention. First, as the ionic strength approaches zero, the activity coefficient approaches a value of one. Thus, in a solution where the ionic strength is zero, an ion s activity and concentration are identical. We can take advantage of this fact to determine a reaction s thermodynamic equilibrium constant. The equilibrium constant based on concentrations is measured for several increasingly smaller ionic strengths and the results extrapolated... 

A quantitative solution to an equilibrium problem may give an answer that does not agree with the value measured experimentally. This result occurs when the equilibrium constant based on concentrations is matrix-dependent. The true, thermodynamic equilibrium constant is based on the activities, a, of the reactants and products. A species activity is related to its molar concentration by an activity coefficient, where a = Yi[ ] Activity coefficients often can be calculated, making possible a more rigorous treatment of equilibria. 

Another approach to matrix matching, which does not rely on knowing the exact composition of the sample s matrix, is to add a high concentration of inert electrolyte to all samples and standards. If the concentration of added electrolyte is sufficient, any difference between the sample s matrix and that of the standards becomes trivial, and the activity coefficient remains essentially constant. The solution of inert electrolyte added to the sample and standards is called a total ionic strength adjustment buffer (TISAB). 

---