Acoustic and Thermodynamic Properties of 2-Ethyl-1-hexanol by Means of High-Pressure Speed of Sound Measurements at Temperatures from (293 to 318) K and Pressures up to 101 MPa

Abstract

The speed of sound in 2-ethyl-1-hexanol has been measured in the temperature range from (293.15 to 318.15) K at pressures up to 101 MPa by the pulse-echo-overlap method. The density has been measured in the temperature range from (278.15 to 363.15) K under atmospheric pressure with a vibrating tube densimeter. These experimental results are then used to calculate the densities, isobaric and isochoric heat capacities, isobaric coefficients of thermal expansion, and isentropic and isothermal compressibilities, as well as the internal pressure and ratio of heat capacities as a function of temperature and pressure. The effects of pressure and temperature on these properties are discussed. Densities are correlated with a Tait equation.

The effect of temperature and pressure on acoustic and thermodynamic properties of 1,4-butanediol. The comparison with 1,2-, and 1,3-butanediols

“…The respective uncertainties are estimated (perturbation method) to be better than ±0.3% and ±0.02% for the heat capacity and density, respectively. However, as reported previously [5,30,31], the total uncertainties can be estimated to be better than ±1% and ±0.05% for the heat capacity and density, respectively.…”

Binary mixtures of 2-ethyl-1-hexanol with various functional groups (benzyl chloride, 3-methylaniline, 3-methoxyaniline and 2,6-dimethylcyclohexanone)

“…Values of density, speed of sound, and viscosity are presented in Table 2. These values are in good agreement with the data available in the literature [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14].…”

The Effect of Pressure and Temperature on the Second-Order Derivatives of the Free Energy Functions for Lower Alkanediols

“…However, as reported previously [7,17], the total uncertainties (including a comparison of most results obtained in our laboratory with those obtained in other laboratories by different methods) can be estimated roughly to be better than ±1 % and ±0.05 % for the heat capacity and density, respectively. In my opinion, however, this is a rather pessimistic estimation, and as stated very recently [18], the uncertainties should be better.…”

“…In this last case, the direct calorimetric determination is very difficult and the molar isochoric heat capacity is determined mostly indirectly by means of the acoustic method; for example, from Eq. 6 or an equivalent [18]. The calculated values of C V are summarized in Table 3.…”