Show that a partial molar property is an intensive property

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the derivation of partial molar properties as intensive properties, specifically through the mathematical manipulation of derivatives. The key equations presented include the expression for energy, E, as a function of the number of moles, n_i, and the clarification of notation regarding the partial derivatives. The participants emphasize the importance of careful index labeling in derivatives, particularly when transitioning from one index to another. The reference to Chapter 11 of "Introduction to Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics" by Smith and Van Ness provides a foundational context for understanding these concepts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of partial derivatives in thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with intensive and extensive properties
  • Knowledge of the notation used in chemical engineering
  • Basic principles of chemical thermodynamics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of partial molar properties in "Introduction to Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics" by Smith and Van Ness
  • Learn about the implications of intensive properties in thermodynamic systems
  • Explore the mathematical treatment of derivatives in multivariable calculus
  • Investigate the role of index notation in thermodynamic equations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for chemical engineering students, thermodynamics researchers, and professionals seeking to deepen their understanding of partial molar properties and their implications in chemical systems.

mcas
Messages
22
Reaction score
5
Homework Statement
Show that a partial molar property is an intensive property
Relevant Equations
Intensive property ##I##: ##\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} (\frac{\partial I}{\partial n_i}n_i)=0##
Extensive property ##E##: ##\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} (\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i}n_i)=E##
Partial molar property for an extensive property ##E##: ##E^{(p)}_i=(\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i})##
I started by taking a derivative:
$$E = \sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} (E_i^{(p)} n_i) \ \ \ | \cdot \frac{\partial}{\partial n_i}$$
$$\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i}=\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} [\frac{\partial E_i^{(p)}}{\partial n_i}n_i + E_i^{(p)} \frac{\partial n_i}{\partial n_i}]$$
$$\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i}=\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} [\frac{\partial E_i^{(p)}}{\partial n_i}n_i + E_i^{(p)}]$$
$$\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i}=\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} [\frac{\partial E_i^{(p)}}{\partial n_i}n_i + (\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i})]$$
$$\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i} - E=\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} [\frac{\partial E_i^{(p)}}{\partial n_i}n_i ]$$
I'm not sure what to do know. I also have a question regarding theleft hand side -- does ##E## defined as ##E =\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} (\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i}n_i)## depend on ##n_i##? Or is ##\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_i}## equal to 0?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Be careful with your indices. If
E = Σif(ni)
it does not follow that
dE/dni = Σidf(ni)/dni
You want to use a different index label and say
dE/dnj = Σidf(ni)/dnj for a given j.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mcas
mjc123 said:
Be careful with your indices. If
E = Σif(ni)
it does not follow that
dE/dni = Σidf(ni)/dni
You want to use a different index label and say
dE/dnj = Σidf(ni)/dnj for a given j.
Thank you! That looks much better now.
Now I get
$$\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_j}=\sum_{i=1}^{\alpha} [\frac{\partial E_j^{(p)}}{\partial n_i}n_i ]$$
And I'm still confused as to what ##\frac{\partial E}{\partial n_j}## is and how to deal with this term.
 
There is a very interesting derivation of this in Chapter 11, Smith and Van Ness, Introduction to Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mcas
mcas said:
Now I get
$$\frac {\partial E} {\partial n_j} = \sum_{i=1}^α[\frac {\partial E_j^{(p)}} {\partial n_i}ni]$$
No, that should be
$$\frac {\partial E} {\partial n_j} = \sum_{i=1}^α[\frac {\partial E_i^{(p)}} {\partial n_j}ni + E_i^{(p)}\frac {\partial n_i} {\partial n_j}]$$
I don't know if you're on the right lines with the proof, I'm just correcting your notation.
 
mjc123 said:
No, that should be
$$\frac {\partial E} {\partial n_j} = \sum_{i=1}^α[\frac {\partial E_i^{(p)}} {\partial n_j}ni + E_i^{(p)}\frac {\partial n_i} {\partial n_j}]$$
I don't know if you're on the right lines with the proof, I'm just correcting your notation.
Thank you! Now I just need to express ##\frac {\partial n_i} {\partial n_j}## as ##\delta_{ij}## and it's proven.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
698
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K