4.5 Article

Modeling the complex phase behavior of methane, ethane and propane in an ionic liquid up to 11 MPa - A comparison between the PR EoS and the GC EoS

Journal

JOURNAL OF SUPERCRITICAL FLUIDS
Volume 101, Issue -, Pages 63-71

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.supflu.2015.02.030

Keywords

Modeling; Natural gas; CH4; C2H6; C3H8; Ionic liquid; Peng-Robinson; Group contribution; VLE; LLE

Funding

  1. Gas Research Center (GRC) of the Petroleum Institute in Abu Dhabi (U.A.E.) [GRC009]
  2. Petroleum Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, the Peng Robinson equation of state (PR EoS) and a group contribution equation of state (GC EoS) were applied to describe the phase behavior of methane (CH4), ethane (C2H6) and propane (C3H8) in the low-viscosity ionic liquid 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium tetracyanoborate ([hmim][TCB]) to pressures up to 11 MPa. Both models were able to satisfactorily correlate the experimental vapor-liquid equilibria (VLE) at low pressure as well as the liquid-liquid equilibria (LLE) at high pressure (above the critical point) by fitting only one temperature-independent parameter. Moreover, excellent agreement with experimental data was found with both EoS when more than one parameter was fitted. The relative absolute average deviation (AARD) of PR EoS was 1.95% for the CH4 + [hmim][TCB], 3.14% for C2H6 + [hmim][TCB], and 5.51% for the C3H8+ [hmim][TCB] systems. The GC EoS exhibited an AARD of 0.91% for the CH4 + [hmim][TCB], 3.10% for C2H6 + [hmim][TCB], and 5.71% for the C3H8 + [hmim][TCB]. Furthermore, both EoS were assessed for their capability to predict the occurrence of the LLE above critical pressure when the parameters were fitted to solely low pressure VLE data. The GC EoS was found to be a more powerful model to predict the phase behavior of C2H6 and C3H8 in the IL beyond the condition range used to fit the parameters. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available