4.1 Article

A Two-Parameter Theoretical Model for Predicting the Activity and Osmotic Coefficients of Aqueous Electrolyte Solutions

Journal

JOURNAL OF SOLUTION CHEMISTRY
Volume 49, Issue 5, Pages 659-694

Publisher

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10953-020-00987-z

Keywords

Aqueous electrolyte solution; MIVM; Pitzer equation; Activity and osmotic coefficient; eUNIQUAC-NRF model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A thermodynamic model of electrolyte solutions is proposed. The model consists of a long-range term expressed by the Pitzer-Debye-Huckel equation (PDH) and a short-range term expressed by the molecular interaction volume model (MIVM). The new model was fitted with 39 different types of single electrolyte systems and was compared with the Pitzer equation, and the mean standard deviation (SD) and the mean average relative deviation (ARD%) are 0.0264, 0.0040 and 2.09%, 0.40%, respectively. Meanwhile, the physical meaning of the two electrolyte-specific interaction parameters ( B ca,s and B s,ca) of the new model is also discussed. By further comparison with the Pitzer equation and a state-ofthe-art model, eUNIQUAC-NRF, the new model exhibits relatively robust extrapolation capability, and also shows the potential ability to predict the activity coefficients of individual ions. In addition, only using binary parameters to predict 29 different types of ternary systems, the overall prediction results of the new model are slightly better than those of the Pitzer equation, and the mean SD and ARD% are 0.0288, 0.0396 and 2.88%, 3.81%, respectively. For some cases involving Rb and Cs, the Pitzer equation needs two ternary adjustable parameters ( similar to and similar to) to achieve the prediction accuracy of the new model. Furthermore, we also compared the predictions of the new model with the eUNIQUAC-NRF model for several ternary systems; the new model also shows better performance, and its overall prediction accuracy was about twice that of the eUNIQUAC-NRF model, with the average SD and ARD% values being 0.0261, 0.0546 and 2.63%, 5.80%, respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available