Comparison of volume translation and co-volume functions applied in the Peng-Robinson EoS for volumetric corrections

Dynamics of Live Oil Droplets and Natural Gas Bubbles in Deep Water

“…27,62 The previously-validated thermodynamic module 27 predicts gas-oil equilibrium partitioning and densities of the gas and liquid oil phases based on the Peng-Robinson equation of state 47,48 with volume translation, 51 a method that is widely accepted by the petroleum industry. 63 The resulting fluid property predictions have been validated for pressures of ≤1,000 bar (corresponding to water depths ≤10,000 m) and temperatures of -2-30°C. 27 TAMOC has been successfully validated for methane bubbles (in the laboratory and field) and for fractionations of C 1 -C 20 compounds 6 (in the field), based on data encompassing pressure conditions spanning 1 to 151 bar, 11,12,28 as well as for multiphase plume behavior.…”

Toward accurate density and interfacial tension modeling for carbon dioxide/water mixtures

“…The constant volume translation can be expressed as (Peneloux et al 1982;Jhaveri and Youngren 1988): where v corr is corrected molar volume in cm 3 /mol; v EOS stands for PR-EOS-calculated molar volume in cm 3 /mol; c i is the component-dependent volume shift parameter which can be determined by Eq. (35) (Young et al 2017).…”

“…With regards to phase-density calculations, CEOS based methods tend to overestimate liquid-phase molar volumes. A detailed discussion of this issue can be found in the studies by Matheis et al (2016) and Young et al (2017). In order to address this problem, Martin (1979) introduced the volume translation concept in CEOS to improve liquid-phase volumetric predictions.…”

“…Jhaveri and Youngren (1988) applied volume translation into PR EOS, leading to the improvement of liquid phasedensity predictions. A thorough comparison of different types of volume translation methods can be found in Young et al (2017)'s work. According to the study by Young et al (2017), the temperature-dependent volume translation method developed by Abudour et al (2012bAbudour et al ( , 2013 provides the most accurate estimates on liquid-phase densities without thermodynamic inconsistencies (e.g., crossover of pressure-volume isotherms).…”

“…A thorough comparison of different types of volume translation methods can be found in Young et al (2017)'s work. According to the study by Young et al (2017), the temperature-dependent volume translation method developed by Abudour et al (2012bAbudour et al ( , 2013 provides the most accurate estimates on liquid-phase densities without thermodynamic inconsistencies (e.g., crossover of pressure-volume isotherms). Aasen et al (2017) applied constant volume translation to phase-density calculations of CO 2 /H 2 O mixtures and achieved a significant improvement in density-prediction accuracies.…”