1939
DOI: 10.1021/ja01265a053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vapor Pressures and Accommodation Coefficients of Four Non-Volatile Compounds. The Vapor Pressure of Tri-m-cresyl Phosphate over Polyvinyl Chloride Plastics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
10
0

Year Published

1950
1950
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
2
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Lennard-Jones parameters calculated from Eqs. (15) and (16) are in reasonable agreement with the experimental results.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The Lennard-Jones parameters calculated from Eqs. (15) and (16) are in reasonable agreement with the experimental results.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…14 We have found Eqs. (15) and (16) to be in better agreement with our experimental results than numerous other correlations which have been proposed in the literature.…”
Section: (12)supporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This result shows that the vapor pressure of the mixture is insensitive to the composition, and that the vapor pressures of the components are very similar, grouped within a factor of 2. It has been shown that the vapor pressures of tri-p-cresyl phosphate and tri-m-cresyl phosphate are very similar (6). Small concentrations of volatile components are inconsequential in our experiments. '…”
Section: Tricresyl P H O S P H a T E (Tcp)mentioning
confidence: 47%
“…Under the conditions that the evaporation coefficient is I , and the return rate of gas molecules to the surface is effectively zero because of the Inrge mean-free path under vacuum, it has been shown that the vapor pressure can be calculated from the mass loss rate (5). The accommodation coefficient, a, and, thus, the evaporation coefficient, has been shown to be 1 for aryl phosphate esters (6). Static methods, such as the isoteniscope method, were not chosen because the authors were interested in the rate of mass loss of additives.…”
Section: Methods and Apparatusmentioning
confidence: 99%