Molal Volume Nomographs for Aliphatic Hydrocarbons - Industrial

Ind. Eng. Chem. , 1942, 34 (3), pp 351–351. DOI: 10.1021/ie50387a021. Publication Date: March 1942. ACS Legacy Archive. Note: In lieu of an abstract...
0 downloads 0 Views 80KB Size
Molal Volume

NO.

Nomographs for

I '1

n

I

1-/o

t

5-10

3

6-10

4 5

7-9 5-9 7-10

6-9 8-10

Aliphatic

7-10 8-10 7-8 2-6

Hydrocarbons

2'8

Norma/ olKunes 2Methyl 3 3- ftny/ 2,2-Dlmethyl 2,Z''' 2,32.3'*

-

-

..

-

33-

"

2,2,2'-Trlmethyl

&2,3-

ea

*

Alkenes /norma/)

I1-

Alkynes

*

NO

D. S. DAVIS Wayne University, Detroit, Mich.

F

OLLOWING a study of the molal volume relations of aliphatic hydrocarbons a t their boiling points, Egloff and Kuderl presented the equations : V = ~ ( n 4.4)" - 37.00 (1 ) log (V 37.00) = At B' (2)

+

+

+

1 Egloff, Gustav, and Kuder, R. C., J. P h f f s . Chem., 46 836 (1941).

FIGURE 2

No. n

-9j

2-/o

2

5-/O 6-/O 7-9 6-9

3fthyJ 2 , z - Dimethyl

6-9

2,3-

3 4 5

-50

Norma/ a~'Kanes

1

2- Methy/ 3" 1,

"

7 /O 13

7-/O

3>3-

3-6

I-

AtKenes (normal)

/4

5-8

I-

AlKyneS

e

eB

NO

---.

50

i

.-

--.

.lu*

/5

IB

FIGURE 1 351

i

250

200

where V = molal volume of liquid, ml. n = number of carbon atoms in moolecule t = temperature at boiling point, C. In these equations a is characteristic of the branching, B' depends upon the series, and c and A are characteristic of the unsaturation. The published values of the constants enabled construction of the two line coordinate charts. Figure 1, based upon Equation 1, holds closely for sixty-three aliphatics of the series and ranges of n indicated in the legend; Figure 2, predicated upon Equation 2, covers forty-three of these compounds reliably. The index line in Figure 1 shows that the molal volume of liquid pentyne ( n = 5) is 100 ml. a t the boiling point, while the index line in Figure 2 shows that the molal volume of liquid pentyne (boiling point, 40" C.) is 101 ml. at the boiling point, The standard deviations range from 0.2 to 1.1ml. per mole; Figure 1yields slightly better values than Figure 2 since, as pointed out by Egloff and Kuder, Equation 1 is a function of n, a pure number, while Equation 2 depends upon experimental boiling points.