Does Combusting Different Amounts of Propane Change Final Temperature?

  • Context: Chemistry 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zenterix
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thermochemistry
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the effect of combusting different amounts of propane on the final temperature of the combustion products. Participants explore the thermodynamic calculations involved in determining the flame temperature for both 1 mol and 1.01 mol of propane, considering the enthalpy of reaction and heat capacities of the products. The scope includes theoretical and mathematical reasoning related to combustion chemistry.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the combustion reaction for propane and calculates the enthalpy of reaction for 1 mol of propane, noting that the temperature of the products increases during combustion.
  • Another participant asserts that the flame temperature is independent of the amount of propane burned, as long as the fuel-to-air ratio remains constant.
  • A different participant points out that while more propane is used, more air is also consumed, and thus the total amount of heated reaction products increases.
  • One participant calculates a flame temperature of 2764.14K for 1.01 mol of propane and compares it to an automated grading system's value of 2740K, questioning the consistency of heat capacity adjustments in the calculations.
  • Several participants clarify that the heat capacity is per mole and that the enthalpy change must account for the number of moles in the calculations.
  • There is a question about whether to equate the enthalpy of reaction for the original combustion of propane or the adjusted reaction for 1.01 mol when calculating the final temperature.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the dependency of flame temperature on the amount of propane burned, with some asserting independence based on stoichiometry while others highlight the implications of increased product amounts. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct approach to equate enthalpy changes in the context of varying amounts of propane.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential discrepancies in heat capacity values and the treatment of enthalpy of reaction for different amounts of propane, indicating that assumptions about heat capacities and stoichiometric ratios may affect the calculations.

zenterix
Messages
774
Reaction score
84
Homework Statement
Consider the combustion of propane gas by oxygen in the Earth's air. Assume air is a mixture of ##N_2## and ##O_2## in a 4 to 1 ratio.

Assume that the flame burns under adiabatic and constant pressure conditions.

In addition, we are given that

$$\mathrm{\Delta_f H^\circ (C_3H_8,g,298.15K)=-104\frac{kJ}{mol}}$$

$$C\mathrm{_P(C_3H_8,g,298.15K)=84\frac{J}{mol\cdot K}}$$

$$\mathrm{\Delta_f H^\circ (H_2O,g,298.15K)=-241.80\frac{kJ}{mol}}$$

$$\mathrm{\Delta_f H^\circ (CO_2,g,298.15K)=-393.51\frac{kJ}{mol}}$$
Relevant Equations
What is the final temperature ##T_f## for the adiabatic flame when 1.01 mol of propane are burnt with a stoichiometric amount of air?

Assume all ##C_P##'s are independent of ##T##.
The combustion reaction for 1 mol of propane is

$$\mathrm{C_3H_8(g)+5O_2(g)+20N_2(g)\rightarrow 3CO_2(g)+4H_20(g)+20N_2}\tag{1}$$

and by using the given enthalpies of formation we can easily compute

$$\Delta_{rxn} H^\circ=-2043.73\text{kJ}$$

This enthalpy of reaction is for an isothermal combustion. That is, in (1), both reactants and products are at the same temperature of 298.15K.

When the reaction actually happens, as the propane is combusting, the heat generated stays in the system and temperature of the products is raised.

Schematically, we have

1719955982013.png


The top path is the isothermal combustion (for which we calculated the reaction enthalpy).

The bottom path has two steps: first, the reaction occurs adiabatically and at constant pressure, generating products at a higher temperature ##T_f##; second, the products are cooled at constant pressure to 298.15K.

The enthalpy of reaction of the first step is zero since it is an adiabatic process.

The enthalpy of reaction of the second step is just ##\int_{T_f}^{298.5K} C_P dT## where ##C_P## is the constant pressure heat capacity of the products at temperature ##T_f##.

Since both the top and bottom paths start and end in the same states we can equate their enthalpies of reaction.

$$-2043.73\text{kJ}=\int_{T_f}^{298.5K} C_P dT\tag{2}$$

where

$$C_P=(3\cdot 37.25+4\cdot 33.577+20\cdot 29.12)\mathrm{\frac{J}{mol\cdot K}=828.458\frac{J}{K}}\tag{3}$$

We can solve (2) for ##T_f## and we find

$$T_f=2764.17\text{K}$$

Note, however, that these calculations seem to be for the combustion of 1 mol of propane. The problem asks for the combustion of 1.01 mol of propane.

This is where I have questions.
It seems the reaction becomes

$$\mathrm{1.01C_3H_8(g)+5.05O_2(g)+20.2N_2(g)\rightarrow 3.03CO_2(g)+4.04H_20(g)+20.2N_2}\tag{1a}$$

and the enthalpy of reaction is just ##1.01\cdot (-2043.73)\text{kJ}##.

The enthalpy of the bottom path in the picture above is

$$\int_{T_f}^{298.15} C_PdT$$

which we equation to ##1.01\cdot (-2043.73)\text{kJ}##.

Note, however, that we have more product at ##T_f## than we did before. Thus, it seems that the heat capacity of these products at ##T_f## is just 1.01 times what we had before

$$C^{new}_P=1.01\cdot 828.458\mathrm{\frac{J}{K}}$$

But then, when we write

$$\int_{T_f}^{298.15} C^{new}_PdT=\int_{T_f}^{298.15}1.01C_PdT=1.01\cdot (-2043.73)\text{kJ}$$

don't the factors of 1.01 cancel?

There seems to be something wrong since the cancelling would mean that ##T_f## doesn't depend on how much propane burns.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Stoichiometry means that the fuel to air ratio stays the same. Equation (1) and (1a) are the same and the flame temperature is indeed independent of the actual amount of propane. The flame temperature only changes when the ratio between propane and air changes.
 
You are using more propane, but you are using more air too, and the amounts of reaction products than get heated is also greater.
 
Here is the thing. I reached the result that the temperature of the flame is 2764.14K.

This problem is from an automated grading system on EdX. Their temperature for the flame is 2740K.

I can obtain this result if I do the following

$$C^{new}_P=1.01\cdot C_P=836.74$$

$$\int_{T_f}^{298.15} C^{new}_PdT=(249.47-0.836T_F)\text{kJ}$$

and I now equate this to the enthalpy of reaction for the initial reaction.

$$(249.47-0.836T_F)\text{kJ}=-2043.73$$

and solve

$$T_F=2740$$

In other words, to compute the temperature when we burn 1.01 mol of propane, they seem to have updated the heat capacity of the products to a account for the extra amount of products, but they did not do the same for the original reaction enthalpy.

Are they correct in this?
 
Cp is the heat capacity per mole To get the enthalpy change, you multiply the Cp by the number of moles, and by the temperature change.
 
Chestermiller said:
Cp is the heat capacity per mole To get the enthalpy change, you multiply the Cp by the number of moles, and by the temperature change.
This is clear. After all, this is exactly the calculation of ##C^{new}_P## in post #4: I multiplied the molar heat capacity ##C_P## by the number of moles, 1.01.

The change in enthalpy to cool the products down from ##T_f## to ##298.15\text{K}## is then ##\int_{T_f}^{298.15} C_P^{new}dT##.

This is all clear.

The question is, can we equate this to the enthalpy of reaction of (1) in the OP, or must we equate it to the enthalpy of reaction of (1a)?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K