Vapor/liquid calculation method

In vapor-liquid equilibria, it is relatively easy to start the iteration because assumption of ideal behavior (Raoult s law) provides a reasonable zeroth approximation. By contrast, there is no obvious corresponding method to start the iteration calculation for liquid-liquid equilibria. Further, when two liquid phases are present, we must calculate for each component activity coefficients in two phases since these are often strongly nonlinear functions of compositions, liquid-liquid equilibrium calculations are highly sensitive to small changes in composition. In vapor-liquid equilibria at modest pressures, this sensitivity is lower because vapor-phase fugacity coefficients are usually close to unity and only weak functions of composition. For liquid-liquid equilibria, it is therefore more difficult to construct a numerical iteration procedure that converges both rapidly and consistently. 

The accuracy of our calculations is strongly dependent on the accuracy of the experimental data used to obtain the necessary parameters. While we cannot make any general quantitative statement about the accuracy of our calculations for multicomponent vapor-liquid equilibria, our experience leads us to believe that the calculated results for ternary or quarternary mixtures have an accuracy only slightly less than that of the binary data upon which the calculations are based. For multicomponent liquid-liquid equilibria, the accuracy of prediction is dependent not only upon the accuracy of the binary data, but also on the method used to obtain binary parameters. While there are always exceptions, in typical cases the technique used for binary-data reduction is of some, but not major, importance for vapor-liquid equilibria. However, for liquid-liquid equilibria, the method of data reduction plays a crucial role, as discussed in Chapters 4 and 6. 

There is, of course, a mass of rather direct evidence on orientation at the liquid-vapor interface, much of which is at least implicit in this chapter and in Chapter IV. The methods of statistical mechanics are applicable to the calculation of surface orientation of assymmetric molecules, usually by introducing an angular dependence to the inter-molecular potential function (see Refs. 67, 68, 77 as examples). Widom has applied a mean-held approximation to a lattice model to predict the tendency of AB molecules to adsorb and orient perpendicular to the interface between phases of AA and BB [78]. In the case of water, a molecular dynamics calculation concluded that the surface dipole density corresponded to a tendency for surface-OH groups to point toward the vapor phase [79]. 

For vaporAiquid separators there is often a liquid residence (holdup) time required for process surge. Tables 1, 2, and 3 give various rules of thumb for approximate work. The vessel design method in this chapter under the Vapor/Liquid Calculation Method heading blends the required liquid surge with the required vapor space to obtain the total separator volume. Finally, a check is made to see if the provided liquid surge allow s time for any entrained water to settle. 

For rough sizing check of vapor/liquid separators and accumulators, see the Fluor method in Chapter 8, Separators/Accumulators—Vapor/Liquid calculation method. 

Conduction takes place at a solid, liquid, or vapor boundary through the collisions of molecules, without mass transfer taking place. The process of heat conduction is analogous to that of electrical conduction, and similar concepts and calculation methods apply. The thermal conductivity of matter is a physical property and is its ability to conduct heat. Thermal conduction is a function of both the temperature and the properties of the material. The system is often considered as being homogeneous, and the thermal conductivity is considered constant. Thermal conductivity, A, W m, is defined using Fourier s law. 

The application of information in Figure 6.19 requires some explanation. The decision as to which calculation method to choose should be based upon the phase of the vessel s contents, its boiling point at ambient pressure T its critical temperature Tf, and its actual temperature T. For the purpose of selecting a calculation method, three different phases can be distinguished liquid, vapor or nonideal gas, and ideal gas. Should more than be performed separately for each phase, and the... 

The calculation method can be selected by application of the decision tree in Figure 9.2. The liquid temperature is believed to be about 339 K, which is the temperature equivalent to the relief valve set pressure. The superheat limit temperatures of propane and butane, the constituents of LPG, can be found in Table 6.1. For propane, T, = 326 K, and for butane, T i = 377 K. The figure specifies that, if the liquid is above its critical superheat limit temperature, the explosively flashing liquid method must be chosen. However, because the temperature of the LPG is below the superheat limit temperature (T i) for butane and above it for propane, it is uncertain whether the liquid will flash. Therefore, the calculation will first be performed with the inclusion of vapor energy only, then with the combined energy of vapor and liquid. 

In contrast to the Gibbs ensemble discussed later in this chapter, a number of simulations are required per coexistence point, but the number can be quite small, especially for vapor-liquid equilibrium calculations away from the critical point. For example, for a one-component system near the triple point, the density of the dense liquid can be obtained from a single NPT simulation at zero pressure. The chemical potential of the liquid, in turn, determines the density of the (near-ideal) vapor phase so that only one simulation is required. The method has been extended to mixtures [12, 13]. Significantly lower statistical uncertainties were obtained in [13] compared to earlier Gibbs ensemble calculations of the same Lennard-Jones binary mixtures, but the NPT + test particle method calculations were based on longer simulations. 

In the multimedia models used in this series of volumes, an air-water partition coefficient KAW or Henry s law constant (H) is required and is calculated from the ratio of the pure substance vapor pressure and aqueous solubility. This method is widely used for hydrophobic chemicals but is inappropriate for water-miscible chemicals for which no solubility can be measured. Examples are the lower alcohols, acids, amines and ketones. There are reported calculated or pseudo-solubilities that have been derived from QSPR correlations with molecular descriptors for alcohols, aldehydes and amines (by Leahy 1986 Kamlet et al. 1987, 1988 and Nirmalakhandan and Speece 1988a,b). The obvious option is to input the H or KAW directly. If the chemical s activity coefficient y in water is known, then H can be estimated as vwyP[>where vw is the molar volume of water and Pf is the liquid vapor pressure. Since H can be regarded as P[IC[, where Cjs is the solubility, it is apparent that (l/vwy) is a pseudo-solubility. Correlations and measurements of y are available in the physical-chemical literature. For example, if y is 5.0, the pseudo-solubility is 11100 mol/m3 since the molar volume of water vw is 18 x 10-6 m3/mol or 18 cm3/mol. Chemicals with y less than about 20 are usually miscible in water. If the liquid vapor pressure in this case is 1000 Pa, H will be 1000/11100 or 0.090 Pa m3/mol and KAW will be H/RT or 3.6 x 10 5 at 25°C. Alternatively, if H or KAW is known, C[ can be calculated. It is possible to apply existing models to hydrophilic chemicals if this pseudo-solubility is calculated from the activity coefficient or from a known H (i.e., Cjs, P[/H or P[ or KAW RT). This approach is used here. In the fugacity model illustrations all pseudo-solubilities are so designated and should not be regarded as real, experimentally accessible quantities. 

Flash Calculations. The ability to carry out vapor-liquid equilibrium calculations under various specifications (constant temperature, pressure constant enthalpy, pressure etc.) has long been recognized as one of the most important capabilities of a simulation system. Boston and Britt ( 6) reformulated the independent variables in the basic flash equations to make them weakly coupled. The authors claim their method works well for both wide and narrow boiling mixtures, and this has a distinct advantage over traditional algorithms ( 7). 

The constant-molar-overflow assumption rests on several underlying thermodynamic assumptions. The most important one is equal molar heats of vaporization for the two components. The other assumptions are adiabatic operation (no heat leaks) and no heat of mixing or sensible heat effects. These assumptions are most closely approximated for close-boiling isomers. The result of these assumptions on the calculation method can be illustrated with Fig. 13-19, which shows two material balance envelopes cutting through the top section (above the top feed stream or sidestream) of the column. If the liquid flow rate L +i is assumed to be identical to L i, then V = V 2 and the component material balance for both envelopes 1 and 2 can be represented by... 

Thermal Conductivity. In [82], experimental data and calculation methods for ammonia liquid and vapor for the ranges 0.1-49 MPa (1-490 bar) and 20-177 °C... 

Moore, P. K., and Anthony, R. G., The continuous-lumping method for vapor-liquid equilibrium calculations. AIChEJ. 35, 1115 (1989). 

Now it is known that this is not true for all substances the examples of cadmium, sodium chloride, and potassium chloride were cited in Section III. A, where the lack of wetting behavior led to an experimental method for measuring ffj,. If, however, this result is assumed to hold true, then the calculation reduces to a calculation of and a separate calculation or measurement of ff( . Skapski then estimates the difference in energy of the bonds broken to form the solid-vapor and liquid-vapor interfaces from the enthalpy of fusion of the bulk solid and the volume change on melting, and adds to it a small estimated contribution from the entropy change in the outer layer of the liquid and of the solid. The result is... 

---