Paper detail

Empirical correlation of the surface tension versus the viscosity for saturated normal liquids

In 1966 Pelofsky proposed an empirical linear correlation between the natural logarithm of the surface tension and the reciprocal viscosity, which seems to work adequately for a wide range of fluids. In particular, it has been shown that it is useful in the case of n-alkanes and their binary and ternary mixtures. More recently however, it has been found not to work for several ionic liquids unless the reciprocal viscosity is raised to a power. The exponent of this power was fixed to be 0.3, at least for the studied ionic fluids. In the present work, the performance and accuracy of both the original Pelofsky correlation and the modified expression including the exponent are studied for 56 non-ionic fluids of different kinds over a broad range of temperatures. Also, the temperature range is delimited for which each expression reproduces the surface tension values with average absolute deviations below 1%. The needed coefficients are given for both the broad and the delimited temperature range for each expression. Unfortunately, the results show that the value of the exponent in the modified Pelofsky expression is substance-dependent for the normal fluids studied.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.