Finding the compressibility factor (Z)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the compressibility factor (Z) for 20 kg of hydrogen gas at high pressure and temperature. The user initially struggles with the correct values for reduced pressure (Pr) and reduced temperature (Tr) and questions how to derive Z. After some back-and-forth, it is clarified that Tr should be calculated correctly, leading to a value of 1.59, while Pr is confirmed at 0.9. The user ultimately finds a chart in their textbook that suggests Z is approximately 0.95, allowing them to compute the volume occupied by the hydrogen gas accurately. The conversation highlights the importance of precise calculations and the use of resources like charts for thermodynamic properties.
awyea
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Determine the volume, in m^3, occupied by 20 kg of hydrogen (H2) at 1170 kPa, 2220°C.

Homework Equations



Z=pv/rt, Pr=P/Pc, Tr=T/Tc, and for hydrogen M = 2.016 (kg/kmol) Tc = 33.2 (K) Pc = 13.0 bar Zc=pc*vc/(RTc)


The Attempt at a Solution


I know if I find Z then the problem is a done deal. I'm just confused about how to use Pr,Tr, and the table to find Z. I found Pr=.9 and Tr=1.59 but is there a formula for Z?

Thanks in advance for the help (I'm not a fan of Thermo so far and my Profs at my old college spoiled me with great teaching)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Isn't it just an ideal gas question?
 
Sadly no, Z is the factor that relates PV/RT of Hydrogen to the PV/RT of and ideal gas. Hydrogen in this problem, because of the high temperatures and pressure, is not an ideal gas.
 
awyea said:

Homework Statement


Determine the volume, in m^3, occupied by 20 kg of hydrogen (H2) at 1170 kPa, 2220°C.

Homework Equations



Z=pv/rt, Pr=P/Pc, Tr=T/Tc, and for hydrogen M = 2.016 (kg/kmol) Tc = 33.2 (K) Pc = 13.0 bar Zc=pc*vc/(RTc)


The Attempt at a Solution


I know if I find Z then the problem is a done deal. I'm just confused about how to use Pr,Tr, and the table to find Z. I found Pr=.9 and Tr=1.59 but is there a formula for Z?

Thanks in advance for the help (I'm not a fan of Thermo so far and my Profs at my old college spoiled me with great teaching)

Something is sadly amiss. You have said that you found Tr = 1.59, after also saying that T = 2220+273 K and Tc = 33.2K. But when I calculate using the equation that you have supplied

Tr = T/Tc

I get Tr = 2493/33.2 , which is roughly 78, not 1.59! Your value for pr seems about right, although you will need to carry at least 1 more significant figure, and preferably 2 more to get a result with any precision.

The other point is that I am not seeing an equation for whichever approach you are using to approximate the ideal gas equation, if that is not good enough. Van der Waals equation? Virial theorem calculation? or what?
 
Ok, I feel really bad about this, the T value is -220 °C, which makes the Tr come out to 53.0K/33.2k=1.59. Pr=.900 with the correct number of sig. figs. After reading the question twice more, looking for something about how to approximate Z, i finally found the attached chart hiding in the back of the book. This makes it look like Z should be .95, although it seems like a very inaccurate way to find it. If this is true, v=(8.314m3Pa/(k*mol)*53K*.95/(11.7x10^3 Pa)=.0358m3/mol
Using dimensional analysis, .0358m3/mol / .00202 kg/mol * 20kg = 354 m3, and it looks like I could have done this problem without wasting everyone's time. Sorry about that.
 

Attachments

  • Capture.PNG
    Capture.PNG
    54.7 KB · Views: 7,882
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top