Melting/freezing point depression of water vs. other liquids

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the Gibbs-Thomson equation and its application to the freezing/melting point depression of liquids, particularly water, in confined spaces such as cylindrical pores. The Young-Laplace equation is utilized to derive the relationship between pressure drop and curvature, while the Clausius-Clapeyron relation is employed to connect pressure and temperature changes during phase transitions. The key conclusion is that the negative volume change (\Delta V) for water does not lead to a negative temperature change (\Delta T) due to the unique properties of the ice-water interface, specifically the surface tension (\gamma) being negative in this context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Gibbs-Thomson equation
  • Familiarity with the Young-Laplace equation
  • Knowledge of the Clausius-Clapeyron relation
  • Concept of surface tension in phase transitions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Gibbs-Thomson equation in detail
  • Explore the implications of the Young-Laplace equation in various liquid interfaces
  • Investigate the behavior of other liquids under confinement and their freezing point depressions
  • Read research papers on the corrected Clausius-Clapeyron equation for phase transitions
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in physical chemistry, materials scientists, and anyone studying phase transitions in confined systems, particularly those interested in the unique properties of water and its behavior under varying conditions.

sir_manning
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Hey

I'm trying to derive the Gibbs-Thomson equation for the freezing/melting point depression of liquids inside a confined space, such as a cylindrical pore. This has been observed for many liquids, such as water, benzene, heptane, etc. Basically my question is, why does water, which expands in volume when frozen, also has its freezing point reduced in pores?

Here's a more detailed account of my confusion. The Young-Laplace equation for the pressure drop ΔP across a hemispherical interface with radius r reads
\Delta P = \frac{2 \gamma}{r},
with \gamma as the surface tension of the interface. For a liquid meniscus, this is the surface tension of the liquid-vapour interface, but for an ice-water interface, this is the surface tension of the solid-liquid interface.

So far so good. Now, to get the Gibbs-Thomson equation, the 'ol Clausius-Clapeyron relation is whipped out:
\frac{\Delta P}{\Delta T} \approx \frac{dP}{dT} = \frac{L_T}{\Delta V}\frac{1}{T},
with L_T as the total latent heat of transformation. For a phase transition from ice to water, \frac{\Delta P}{\Delta T} is negative because \Delta V is negative, unlike most liquids where \frac{\Delta P}{\Delta T} is positive.

Anyway, to get the Gibbs-Thomson equation, this is plugged into the Young-Lapace equation above for \Delta P, giving
T(r=\infty) - T(r) = \Delta T = \frac{2 \gamma \Delta V T}{L_T r}.

So since \Delta V is negative for water, why isn't \Delta T negative as well, causing confined water to melt at a temperature higher than 0 degrees? I'm guessing that \gamma is negative, which in this case is the surface tension of the ice-water interface, where for other liquids in contact with their frozen phase, it's positive. This would cancel out the negative from the \Delta V.

Thanks for any input.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I know where I've gone wrong, just in case someone comes across this post in the future.

The Clausius-Clapeyron equation only applies in the case of a flat boundary between two phases. In the macroscopic world, the discrepancy is so small it can be ignored. However, when deriving the Gibbs-Thomson equation with the corrected version of the CC equation, there is assumed to be no volume change, so \Delta V \rightarrow V. This paper was pretty useful.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
640
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K