Water vapor numerical values

The water-vapor transmission rate (WVTR) is another descriptor of barrier polymers. Strictly, it is not a permeabihty coefficient. The dimensions are quantity times thickness in the numerator and area times a time interval in the denominator. These dimensions do not have a pressure dimension in the denominator as does the permeabihty. Common commercial units for WVTR are (gmil)/(100 in. d). Table 2 contains conversion factors for several common units for WVTR. This text uses the preferred nmol/(m-s). The WVTR describes the rate that water molecules move through a film when one side has a humid environment and the other side is dry. The WVTR is a strong function of temperature because both the water content of the air and the permeabihty are direcdy related to temperature. Eor the WVTR to be useful, the water-vapor pressure difference for the value must be reported. Both these facts are recognized by specifying the relative humidity and temperature for the WVTR value. This enables the user to calculate the water-vapor pressure difference. Eor example, the common conditions are 90% relative humidity (rh) at 37.8°C, which means the pressure difference is 5.89 kPa (44 mm Hg). 

The procedure of Beutier and Renon as well as the later on described method of Edwards, Maurer, Newman and Prausnitz ( 3) is an extension of an earlier work by Edwards, Newman and Prausnitz ( ). Beutier and Renon restrict their procedure to ternary systems NH3-CO2-H2O, NH3-H2S-H2O and NH3-S02 H20 but it may be expected that it is also useful for the complete multisolute system built up with these substances. The concentration range should be limited to mole fractions of water xw 0.7 a temperature range from 0 to 100 °C is recommended. Equilibrium constants for chemical reactions 1 to 9 are taken from literature (cf. Appendix II). Henry s constants are assumed to be independent of pressure numerical values were determined from solubility data of pure gaseous electrolytes in water (cf. Appendix II). The vapor phase is considered to behave like an ideal gas. The fugacity of pure water is replaced by the vapor pressure. For any molecular or ionic species i, except for water, the activity is expressed on the scale of molality m ... 

The simultaneous solution of the equations for ai, 02, and K will yield an a versus X curve if all the underlying parameters were known. To this end, Futerko and Hsing fitted the numerical solutions of these simultaneous equations to the experimental points on the above-discussed water vapor uptake isotherms of Hinatsu et al. This determined the best fit values of x and X was first assumed to be constant, and in improved calculations, y was assumed to have a linear dependence on 02, which slightly improved the results in terms of estimated data fitting errors. The authors also describe methods for deriving the temperature dependences of x and K using the experimental data of other workers. 

What happens in the reverse processes, when water vapor condenses to hq-uid water or liquid water freezes to ice The same amounts of energy are released in these exothermic processes as are absorbed in the endothermic processes of vaporization and melting. Thus, the molar enthalpy (heat) of condensation (A//gojjd) the molar enthalpy of vaporization have the same numerical value but opposite signs. Similarly, the molar enthalpy (heat) of solidification (A/Zg iid) and the molar enthalpy of fusion have the same numerical value but differ in sign. 

Numerous experimental studies, made mostly with silica gels and other high specific area silicas exposed to water vapor, reported abundances of the silanol groups as high as 6per 100 A2 [33,49]. Zhuravlev [50] believes that the number of OH groups per unit area, when the surface is hydroxylated to the maximal degree, is a physico-chemical constant, equal to (4.6 to 4.9) hydroxyls per 100 A. He obtained this value... 

In 2005, it was experimentally found that the slow recovery rate to NO2 of the YSZ-based mixed-potential sensor with the NiO-SE can be significantly improved when the sample gas was humidified with 5 vol. % water vapor. These results were published in 2006 [13]. Figure 2.12 [41] illustrates numerical and experimental values for the response/recovery transients to 400 ppm NO2 in 5 vol. % O2 with a N2 balance in the absence (a) and presence (b) of 5 vol. % H2O at 850°C. Sample... 

Further experiments 448), in particular those performed under water vapor pressure, confirmed these data. If the value for Qok is taken not from Table XI but from Fig. 56 the numerical value of ei.caic will become still better. 

This is based upon the so-called triple point of water, where all three states of aggregation (ice, water, water vapor) coexist and where pressure can be ignored. [When water is at the triple point, the pressure is fixed (see Sect. 11.5).] This odd numerical value is chosen so that the temperature difference between the normal freezing and boiling points of water is close to 100 units, as it is in the Celsius scale. For this reason, one Kelvin is one 273.16th of the thermodynamic temperature of the triple point of water. The zero point of the Kelvin scale lies at the absolute zero point which is indicated by an absence of entropy in the body. When one wishes to establish the relation between thermodynamic temperature T and Celsius temperature 5, it is important to be careful to set the zero point of the Celsius scale to the freezing point of water at normal pressure. This lies nearly exactly 0.01 K under the temperature of water s triple point, so that ... 

As was mentioned earlier, the strength of the inherent tendency to transform, and with it the numerical value of p, fundamentally depends upon the nature of the substance. In this context, we see the nature of a substance being determined by its chemical composition, characterized by its content formula, but also by its state of aggregation, its crystalline stmcture, etc. Hence, liquid water and water vapor as well as diamond and graphite will exhibit different chemical potentials under otherwise identical conditions and therefore need to be treated as different substances. In addition, the strength of the tendency to transform also depends upon the milieu in which the substance is located. By milieu we mean the totality of parameters such as temperature T, pressure p, concentration c, the type of solvent S, type and proportions of constituents of a mixmre, etc., which are necessary to clearly characterize the environment of B. In order to express these relations, we may write... 

A few numerical values are useful for orientation. Volume increases generally around 3 % during melting. Water ice, whose volume actually decreases during melting is a well-known but rare exception. Evaporation volume is determined almost solely by the volume demand of the vapor with 25 L mol at room conditions. (Compared to that, the volume required by the same substance in its condensed state is so small that it can be ignored.)... 

Equation (11.8) formally corresponds to the August vapor pressure formula. In 1862, Ernst Ferdinand August developed a formula based upon water vapor pressure, having the form lg p = —A/ S + C) + 6 the quantities A, B, C were parameters to be determined empirically, 9 indicated the Celsius temperature, and p the numerical value of the pressure. 

In applications, the reduced system is embedded in a 1 + ID computational scheme for the overall fuel cell. This includes a model of the membrane s water content and temperature, the anode GDL, and the variation of the oxygen and water vapor contents in the flow field channels in the along-the-channel direction, providing the channel conditions and fluxes which were taken as prescribed in the analysis. To present numerical results from the reduced system, we simulate this coupling by providing along-the-channel data for the oxygen and water vapor concentrations, temperature, current density, and catalyst layer production of heat and total water from a previous 1 + ID computation reported in [3]. These values vary in the y direction but are constant in time and do not couple back to the reduced simulations. 

In Example 9.3, we used data for the vapor pressure of water at several temperatures to estimate the molar enthalpy of vaporization of water. In this example, the pressures were in units of mmHg. The numerical values of P (and thus In P) will depend upon the choice of units however, the calculated molar enthalpy of vaporization should be independent of this choice, (a) Convert the pressure values in Example 9.3 to bar and repeat the calculation of A//vap for water to demonstrate that the value obtained does not depend upon the pressure units, (b) Demonstrate mathematically that the slope of Equation 9.5 (and thus A//, ) is independent of the units used for pressure. 

Table 2.1 contains numerical values of relevant observed skin friction coefficients, Cf. The size of the additional resistance for real and model surfaces has been reviewed by Montieth and Unsworth (1990) and is summarized as follows. For water vapor transfer to rigid rough surfaces the following expression applies ... 

In the standard method, the metal enclosure (called the air chamber) used to hold the hydrocarbon vapors is immersed in water before the test, then drained but not dried. This mode of operation, often designated as the wet bomb" is stipulated for all materials that are exclusively petroleum. But if the fuels contain alcohols or other organic products soluble in water, the apparatus must be dried in order that the vapors are not absorbed by the water on the walls. This technique is called the dry bomb" it results in RVP values higher by about 100 mbar for some oxygenated motor fuels. When examining the numerical results, it is thus important to know the technique employed. In any case, the dry bomb method is preferred. 

In the book, Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium Data Collection, Gmehling and colleagues (1981), nonlinear regression has been applied to develop several different vapor-liquid equilibria relations suitable for correlating numerous data systems. As an example, p versus xx data for the system water (1) and 1,4 dioxane (2) at 20.00°C are listed in Table El2.3. The Antoine equation coefficients for each component are also shown in Table E12.3. A12 and A21 were calculated by Gmehling and colleaques using the Nelder-Mead simplex method (see Section 6.1.4) to be 2.0656 and 1.6993, respectively. The vapor phase mole fractions, total pressure, and the deviation between predicted and experimental values of the total p... 

Vapor-liquid equilibrium data obtained for the 2-propanol-water binary system at 75 °C agreed well with the values calculated from the total pressure data used in the numerical method of Mixon et al. (9). Thus, the apparatus used in this work gives consistent data. 

Returning to the Nissan and Hansen model, they use a finite difference numerical analysis model to determine both the temperature profile of a sheet material and the subsequent water removal as it passes over the cylinder. Their experimental results match well with the predicted values. However, their experiments were limited to a cylinder surface temperature of 93.3°C. Accordingly, the maximum vapor pressure of the evaporated water is less than one atmosphere. The diffusion model advanced by Hartley and Richards is in close agreement with experimental work of Dreshfield(12l. However, the boundary conditions are still relatively uncertain since the convective flow region outside the sheet is relatively unknown. Later work by this author studies this convective flow. 

---