What are the coefficients of thermal expansion for methanol in F^-1?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the coefficients of thermal expansion for methanol, specifically seeking values in degrees Fahrenheit (F^-1) rather than degrees Celsius (C^-1). Participants explore the implications of these coefficients on pressure calculations in a thermodynamic context, including the derivation of equations related to thermal expansion and pressure changes in a confined system.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks coefficients of thermal expansion for methanol in F^-1, expressing frustration with discrepancies in tabulated values and their application in derived equations.
  • Another participant corrects the conversion factor from C^-1 to F^-1, providing a specific value for the thermal expansion coefficient of methanol at 25°C.
  • There is a discussion about the applicability of the derived equations when they yield imaginary numbers, suggesting potential flaws in the approach or assumptions made.
  • Participants debate whether the coefficient of thermal expansion increases or decreases with temperature, with one participant noting that the thermal expansion coefficient may not remain constant across temperature ranges.
  • One participant mentions using computerized databases for fluid properties to obtain pressure values, contrasting this with the analytical approach taken by others.
  • Concerns are raised about the physical feasibility of calculated pressures, especially in relation to the properties of the container holding the methanol.
  • Another participant questions the validity of using a single value for the thermal expansion coefficient at varying temperatures, emphasizing the need for accurate fluid properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conversion of thermal expansion coefficients and the applicability of derived equations. There is no consensus on whether the coefficient of thermal expansion increases or decreases with temperature, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to calculate pressure changes in the system.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific temperature ranges for the thermal expansion coefficient and the potential inaccuracies in applying a single value across varying conditions. The discussion also highlights the challenges of deriving pressure values without access to comprehensive fluid property databases.

  • #31
Hi CS. Feel free to butt in all you want. :smile: I think Ron already bought REFPROP database though (per post 24).

Ron, I assume you bought REFPROP, is that right?

What I'm saying about using Cp is that you can't use it. You can't use Cp nor Cv because both of these are for specific cases (either constant pressure or constant volume). So I would recommend using the database.

I understand you have the initial state, volume, and mass. The only thing you know about the final state is temperature. You don't have volume either since we are assuming that will change depending on pressure. But pressure depends on heat input.

Here’s my suggestion. Calculate vessel volume from the simplified description of a cylinder with a piston and a spring holding back the piston. You can then equate your actual hardware to this model since even if it is a blocked in pipe, you have a linear spring rate dependent on the pipe's modulus of elasticity. So you should be able to create a graph of volume versus pressure for any given model, and that graph will vary depending on the spring rate you choose.

You should also be able to create a graph of pressure versus volume given your known temperature. These two graphs should cross at a single point which is the final volume and pressure for the system at your given final temperature.

Rather than actually graph it, I’d suggest making a spreadsheet using REFPROP and take a guess at the pressure. This will give you the final fluid density which you can then calculate the volume from. This volume however, has to exactly equal the volume of your simplified model with the piston and spring for the given pressure. When the methanol volume and the cylinder volume are equal, you'll have found the solution for the final state of the fluid, including the final pressure. Put a cell in your spreadsheet that takes the difference between the two volumes and make that equal zero by changing the guess at pressure.

Once you do this, you will have found the final state and you could also determine heat input if that’s important to you.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
Q_Goest said:
Hi CS. Feel free to butt in all you want. :smile: I think Ron already bought REFPROP database though (per post 24).

Ron, I assume you bought REFPROP, is that right?

What I'm saying about using Cp is that you can't use it. You can't use Cp nor Cv because both of these are for specific cases (either constant pressure or constant volume). So I would recommend using the database.

I understand you have the initial state, volume, and mass. The only thing you know about the final state is temperature. You don't have volume either since we are assuming that will change depending on pressure. But pressure depends on heat input.

Here’s my suggestion. Calculate vessel volume from the simplified description of a cylinder with a piston and a spring holding back the piston. You can then equate your actual hardware to this model since even if it is a blocked in pipe, you have a linear spring rate dependent on the pipe's modulus of elasticity. So you should be able to create a graph of volume versus pressure for any given model, and that graph will vary depending on the spring rate you choose.

You should also be able to create a graph of pressure versus volume given your known temperature. These two graphs should cross at a single point which is the final volume and pressure for the system at your given final temperature.

Rather than actually graph it, I’d suggest making a spreadsheet using REFPROP and take a guess at the pressure. This will give you the final fluid density which you can then calculate the volume from. This volume however, has to exactly equal the volume of your simplified model with the piston and spring for the given pressure. When the methanol volume and the cylinder volume are equal, you'll have found the solution for the final state of the fluid, including the final pressure. Put a cell in your spreadsheet that takes the difference between the two volumes and make that equal zero by changing the guess at pressure.

Once you do this, you will have found the final state and you could also determine heat input if that’s important to you.

I have not bought REFPROP yet I have just been using the NIST data base
 
  • #33
check it out,

Here is what I did for the thermal expansion, see what you think, I still ended up with 9300 psig even including the modulus of elasticity and I would like a reality check on that number because I was expecting something like 2000-3000 psig but its in the ball park and I have been surprised before.

Thank you for the help this has been great working on this problem along with the Joule thompson problem.

My next endevor is to get into line integration to solve for the surface areas of weird surfaces for fire relief valves.
 

Attachments

  • #34
Sorry the dT should be 80 not 540. This will give you a pressure of 1500 psig which exceeds the pressure of A spec piping. This is so sweet that I was finally able to get a reasonable answer.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K