1 / 65

THE USE OF FLUX-AVERAGED DIFFUSIVITIES TO MODEL MULTICOMPONENT DIFFUSION

THE USE OF FLUX-AVERAGED DIFFUSIVITIES TO MODEL MULTICOMPONENT DIFFUSION. Claudio Olivera-Fuentes TADiP Group Thermodynamics and Transport Phenomena Dept. Simón Bolívar University Caracas, Venezuela. Contents. Constitutive Equations Exact and Approximate Solutions

patty
Télécharger la présentation

THE USE OF FLUX-AVERAGED DIFFUSIVITIES TO MODEL MULTICOMPONENT DIFFUSION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE USE OF FLUX-AVERAGED DIFFUSIVITIES TO MODEL MULTICOMPONENT DIFFUSION Claudio Olivera-Fuentes TADiP Group Thermodynamics and Transport Phenomena Dept. Simón Bolívar University Caracas, Venezuela

  2. Contents • Constitutive Equations • Exact and Approximate Solutions • Definition of Flux-Averaged Diffusivities (FADs) • Examples • Comments and Conclusions

  3. Constitutive Equations

  4. Maxwell-Stefan equations [1] • Molecular diffusion at constant T, P • Fik friction coefficients (resistances) = Fki ? • Dik MS diffusivities (conductances) = Dki ?

  5. Maxwell-Stefan equations [2] • Ji, diffusive or relative fluxes • Ni, net or absolute fluxes

  6. Diffusive interactions • Principle of equipresence • Duncan & Toor (1962) • Diffusion barrier: Potential gradient exists, yet component does not diffuse • Reverse diffusion: Component diffuses “uphill” from smaller to larger potential • Osmotic diffusion: Component diffuses although no potential gradient exists

  7. Binary diffusion • MS for 2-component systems • Fick’s “law” • DAB binary or “ordinary” diffusivity  DBA

  8. Exact v. Approximate Solutions

  9. Ideal gas mixtures • Thermodynamic & diffusive ideality • Simplified MS equations

  10. Continuity equations • Steady-state diffusion • One-dimensional transport • No homogeneous reaction

  11. Unified treatment

  12. Transformed equations • Continuity • Constitutive • Determinacy: boundary values, flux ratios, etc.

  13. Matrix solution, exact • Solve as vector/matrix ODE (Amundson, 1966)

  14. Matrix solution, linearized • Stewart & Prober (1964), Toor (1964) • Uncouple by diagonalization, solve as Fick’s law in pseudo-composition space

  15. Equivalent diffusivity methods • Assume pseudo-binary behavior, solve as Fick’s law in true composition space • Dim “equivalent” or “effective” diffusivity • must depend on fluxes and/or gradients, otherwise

  16. Typical assessment • Dim’s have the advantage of simplicity, but… • They are not system properties • They fail to account for diffusive interaction effects • They depend on transport fluxes which are not always known in advance • They vary with position or with composition in a manner that may require iteration • They may give large errors when used in situations they were not designed to handle • They are no longer justified, in view of the availability of more rigorous analytical and computational tools

  17. Definition of Flux-Averaged Diffusivities

  18. A rigorous definition • Average diffusive interactions for each component • Define flux-average diffusivity (FAD) implicitly as

  19. General FAD solution • Define mean film equivalent diffusivity

  20. Practical application • If correct average FAD can be identified a priori, method is exact • If approximate FAD must be used, this is the only source of error in the method • Arithmetic mean (AM) value used in the literature is most likely in error, because exact solution shows exponential dependence of (y) on h.

  21. Example 1 Evaporation of a pure liquid into a gas mixture in a Stefan tube

  22. Slattery (1999) • Pure liquid A evaporates into a gas mixture of A, B and C in a Stefan tube, arranged in such a manner that the liquid-gas interface remains fixed in space (h = 0) as the evaporation takes place. Species B and C are insoluble in liquid A, nB = nC = 0. At the prevailing conditions, the gas-phase composition of A in equilibrium with the liquid is yA0. The gas mixture blowing past the top of the tube (h = 1) has constant composition yB1, yC1. It is desired to find the rate of evaporation of A.

  23. Problem specifications Pure liquid A Gas mixture nB= nC = 0 yA0 yA1, yB1 interface top of tube h = 0 h = 1

  24. Exact solution: B & C (stagnant ) • From MS equations • Solve for nA, yB0, yC0

  25. FAD solution: B & C (stagnant) • From general FAD solution • From general FAD definition • Hence FAD solution is exact

  26. Exact solution: C (mobile) • From MS equations • Mean film compositions • From solution for B & C

  27. The correct average • Exact • FAD • i.e. mean FAD at log-mean (LM) compositions

  28. What not to do? • Do not use AM compositions to compute FAD • and if you do, don’t blame FAD method for errors! • Do not solve equation for C alone • Use of FAD approach does not overrule system determinacy • Use A & B, A & C or B & C. All combinations give exact solution

  29. AM v LM averages [1] • Parametric analysis • Exact (LM): • Approximate (AM):

  30. AM v LM averages [2] yA2 << yA1 DAB << DAC

  31. Generalization • n– 1 stagnant components • 1 mobile component

  32. Example 2 Diffusion of one component in a stagnant mixture of known average composition

  33. Treybal (1980) • Ammonia (A) is diffusing through a stagnant gas mixture consisting of 1/3 nitrogen (B) and 2/3 hydrogen (C) by volume at 206.8 kPa and 54 °C. Calculate the rate of diffusion of A through a film of gas 0.5 mm thick when the concentration change across the film is 10 to 5 % A by volume

  34. Problem specifications Gas mixture Gas mixture nB= nC = 0 Average A-free composition y´av yA1 yA0 h = 0 h = 1

  35. What average? [1] • This work

  36. What average? [2] • Hsu and Bird (1960) • Does not give

  37. Not all averages are equal!

  38. Example 3 Condensation of mixed vapors in presence of a noncondensable gas

  39. Sherwood et al. (1975) • A condenser operates with a mixture of vapors of ammonia (A), water (B) and hydrogen (C) at 3.36 atm and 200 °F. Mole fractions are yA0 = 0.30, yB0 = 0.40 in the gas bulk (h = 0), and yA1 = 0.455, yB1 = 0.195 at the interface (h = 1), where equilibrium with the local liquid is assumed. Binary diffusivities are DAB = 0.294, DAC = 1.14, DBC = 1.30 cm2.s-1. It is desired to estimate the ratio of condensation fluxes of water and ammonia.

  40. Problem specifications Gas mixture Condensate nC = 0 yA0, yB0 yA1, yB1 bulk gas interface h = 0 h = 1

  41. Exact solution • Gilliland (in Sherwood, 1937) • cf. Toor (1957), Sherwood et al. (1975), Taylor (1981)

  42. Exact, yet false [1] • The special value … • … reduces both equations to • Discarded on physical grounds

  43. Exact, yet false [2] • System is always satisfied by … • … but then this problem becomes overspecified (nmix = 0 in addition to original data!)

  44. FAD solution • From general FAD solution • For any stagnant component (C in this case) … • … but no obvious suggestion for the others

  45. FAD-1 • Literature: Use AM compositions … • … but AM is inconsistent with exact solution

  46. FAD-2 • Use LM compositions for all components … • … but LM is exact only for stagnant components

  47. FAD-3 Not yi, but xi yi – bi! • Recall general FAD solution … • … use flux-averaged compositions

  48. Exact v FAD solutions

  49. Exact v FAD-3

  50. Example 4 Diffusion with rapid heterogeneous catalytic reaction

More Related