Paper detail

Why condensation by compression in pure water vapor cannot occur in an approach based on Euler equations

Phase transitions are in the focus of the modeling of multiphase flows. A large number of models is available to describe such processes. We consider several different two phase models that are based on the Euler equations of compressible fluid flows and which take into account phase transitions between a liquid phase and its vapor. Especially we consider the flow of liquid water and water vapor. We give a mathematical proof, that all these models are not able to describe the process of condensation by compression. This behavior is in agreement with observations in experiments, that simulate adiabatic flows, and shows that the Euler equations give a fairly good description of the process. The mathematical proof is valid for the official standard {\em IAPWS-IF97} for water and for any other good equation of state. Also the opposite case of expanding the liquid phase will be discussed.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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.