Abstract
We consider a one-phase system (so that the assumptions of invertibility discussed in the preceding chapter are justified) in which a single chemical reaction is taking place, say, e.g.,
Equation (3.1.1) does not, of course, imply addition in the ordinary algebraic sense of the quantities CO and O2. The meaning of equation (3.1.1) is to recall the experimentally observed fact that, when a given number of moles of CO is consumed by the reaction, the same number of moles of CO2 is produced, and half as many moles of O2 are consumed. Let the components appearing in the reaction be numbered consecutively, say CO is B 1, O2 is B 2, and CO2 is B 3, and let σ j be the corresponding stoichiometric coefficients, say σ1 = −1, σ2 = −1/2, and σ3 = 1. We note that the stoichiometric coefficients of the species appearing on the left-hand side (the “reactants”) are assigned negative stoichiometric coefficients. Equation (3.1.1) can now be written as follows:
It is very easy but perhaps impudent for me, an academic, an engineer on paper, to criticize those who have successfully created a large-scale commercial reactor, but I ask you to ponder on this point. This is a simple reaction between two molecules at 360 °C. Surely the chemical rate is not terribly small, and at 15 cm/sec in a 10 m deep bed the reactants are in contact for more than a minute. Surely you would be surprised if the reaction was not nearly complete in such a deep bed.
P. N. Rowe
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Literature
The method of determining the rank of the stoichiometric matrix presents some subtlety when different isomers may be present in the reacting mixture; see J. C. Whitwell and R. S. Dartt, AIChE J. 19, 1114 (1973).
Proof that the reaction subspace and the composition space coincide only in the case of isomerization and polymerization reactions is given by G. Astarita, Chem. Eng. Sci. 31, 1224 (1976).
Direct coupling between different chemical reactions is generally excluded as a possibility in the chemical literature; the point is discussed by M. J. Boudart, J. Phys. Chem. 87, 2286 (1983).
The implications of the strong constraint, that every individual chemical reaction proceeds with a nonnegative dissipation rate on possible reaction pathways, are discussed by R. Shinnar and C. A. Feng, Ind. Eng. Chem., Fundam. 24, 153 (1985).
There is ample literature on the mathematics of stoichiometry and mass action kinetics; two important references are E. H. Kerner, Bull. Math. Biophys. 34, 243 (1972).
M. Feinberg, Arch. Ratl. Mech. Anal. 49, 187 (1972).
The general case of linear kinetics is formalized by J. Wei and C. D. Prater, Adv. Catal. 13, 203 (1962).
Point (e) of Problem 3.1 raises the possibility that there may be more than one equilibrium point in the reaction subspace. This is possible in nonideal mixtures; see H. G. Othmer, Chem. Eng. Sci. 31, 993 (1976).
The whole question of independence of chemical reactions, the influence of stoichiometry on the equilibrium behavior of reacting systems, and the stability of chemical equilibrium was discussed in detail long ago by E. Jouguet, J. Ecole Poly., II Ser. 21, 61, 181 (1921); a more recent formal discussion was given by.
R. Aris, Arch. Ratl. Mech. Anal. 19, 81 (1965).
The general theory of homogeneous reacting mixtures, expressed in terms of internal state variables, has an ample literature. Some important references are M. E. Gurtin and A. S. Vargas, Arch. Rath Mech. Anal. 43, 179 (1971)
B. D. Coleman and M. E. Gurtin, J. Chem. Phys. 47, 597 (1967); Phys. Fluids 10, 1454 (1967)
C. A. Truesdell, Rational Thermodynamics, 2nd ed., Chapter 5, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1984).
The best source for the concept of affinity is Th. De Donder and P. Van Rysselberghe, Thermodynamic Theory and Affinity, Stanford University Press (1936); the concept of affinity, however, predates this by quite some time. The word “affinity” was used as far back as 1888 by H. Le Chatelier, Les Equilibres Chimiques, Carré et Naud, Paris (1888), and it was attributed to earlier workers such as Berthelot, if in derogatory terms.
The question of writing the stoichiometric equation for a reaction in the form of equation (3.1.2), with stoichiometric coefficients which can be both positive and negative, also has an old tradition; see, e.g., K. G. Denbigh, The Thermodynamics of the Steady State, Methuen, London (1951).
This leads to the question of what is meant by the so-called “principle of microscopic reversibility.” This is discussed in the Denbigh book cited above, as well as by J. Wei, J. Chem. Phys. 36, 1578 (1962) and by.
G. Astarita, Quad. Ing. Chim. Ital. 14, 1 (1978).
The continuous description of mixtures was first developed by Th. De Donder, L’affinité—Seconde Partie, Gauthier-Villars, Paris (1931). The presentation in Section 3.6, as well as most modern analyses of continuous mixtures, is based on the methodology discussed in the fundamental work of.
R. Aris and G. R. Gavalas, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 260, 351 (1966); however, the second-law implications are based on the methodology presented by Truesdell for the case of a finite number of reactions in the book cited above. The question of substituting pseudocomponents for a mixture, by finding the optimal quadrature points for the integrals appearing in a continuous description, is discussed by
S. K. Shibata, S. I. Sandier, and R. A. Behrens, Chem. Eng. Sci. 42, 197 (1987).
Kinetic analyses for continuous mixtures (mostly linear kinetics) have been reviewed by V. W. Weekman, Chem. Eng. Prog., Symp. Ser. No. 11, 75, 3 (1979) and by
K. B. Bischoff and P. Coxson, Proc. 2nd ICREC Meeting, Pune (1987). Some preliminary analysis of the nonlinear case is discussed by G. Astarita and R. Ocone, AIChE J. 39, 1299 (1988) and by G. Astarita, AIChEJ. (to be published).
A good source for studying functional analysis is F. Riesz and B. Nagy, Functional Analysis, Ungar, New York (1955).
Liapounov functions are discussed in all textbooks on stability analysis; a good source is M. M. Denn. Stability of Reactions and Transport Processes, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1975).
Problem 3.3 is a variation of the classical predator-prey model of A. J. Lotka, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 42, 1595 (1920); Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 6, 410 (1920). In the Lotka formulation the kinetic equations are
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Astarita, G. (1989). Homogeneous Reactions. In: Thermodynamics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0771-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0771-4_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-0773-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-0771-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive