Water Phase Diagram: Mathematically Modeling and Validating

AI Thread Summary
Water phase diagrams typically show a linear solid-liquid boundary, which raises questions about the mathematical modeling behind this representation. The Clapeyron equation, which integrates to yield a logarithmic relationship, suggests that ΔH and ΔV_m cannot be treated as constant for accurate modeling. The steep slope observed in these diagrams is attributed to low pressure conditions, with significant deviations occurring at higher pressures. While local approximations may yield a straight line, the overall shape of the phase boundary is more complex, particularly at high pressures where non-linear behaviors emerge. Understanding these nuances is essential for accurately representing water's phase behavior in diagrams.
DLawless
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I notice that water phase diagrams provided online always seem to show a rather linear behaviour for the solid-liquid boundary (and an extremely steep slope).

How is this modeled mathematically? Say we use the Clapeyron equation with ΔH and ΔV_m being constant, as online example problems (meant for students) do. Integration with this yields a ln(T2/T1) for example--not the equation of a straight line. So where does the almost straight line, which suggests that P=kT for some very large negative k, come from? And how valid is it really to model ΔH and ΔV_m as constant, if this doesn't produce a line that looks much like the diagrams show?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is not linear. Here is a phase diagram: It's complicated.
DLawless said:
Integration with this yields a ln(T2/T1) for example
For what, and what are T1 and T2?

The line is so steep because both a few hundred kPa is a low pressure in the context of water and ice. You see larger deviations at tens of MPa.
 
Many other diagrams show a line, e.g. https://uh.edu/~jbutler/physical/chapter6notes.html, https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/schwartz/files/9-phases.pdf. I saw the diagram you mentioned too.

I would like to know the mathematical model that leads to either of these. It doesn't appear to be constant ΔH and ΔV_m since neither the shape in the diagram you linked, nor a straight line, corresponds well to

$$P = P_0 + \frac{\Delta H}{\Delta V_m} \rm{ln} \frac{T}{T_0}$$

which is the result from integrating Clapeyron equation. (T0,P0) can be any known point, e.g. (273.15 K, 1 atm) for water solidus

Yet all the problems/examples one finds online seems to treat ΔH and ΔV_m as constant. If it is valid to do so I would like to know how the boundary can have the shape we see on the diagrams.
 
mfb said:
Locally (if T/T0 doesn't deviate too much from 1) a logarithm looks like a straight line.

Good point! That may explain the linear shape.

What about the non-linear curved bits at high pressure (that you can see on the diagram you linked originally, or the one here https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/schwartz/files/9-phases.pdf on p4)? They don't necessarily appear to follow the equation I gave...

Edit: actually it looks like there might be a cusp and another independent solidus?
 
The ##\Delta V## is tiny, and that accounts for the huge slope.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top