COMPRESSIBILITY FACTORS FOR NATURAL AND SOUR

RESERVOIR GASES BY CORRELATIONS AND
CUBIC EQUATIONS OF STATE

by
NEERAJ KUMAR, B.Tech.
A THESIS
IN
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for
the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
PETROLEUM ENGINEERING
Approved

Akanni Lawal
Chairperson of the Committee

Paulus Adisoemarta

Accepted

John Borrelli
Dean of the Graduate School
December, 2004

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are many people who were associated with this thesis who deserve
recognition. I would like to thank Dr. Akanni S. Lawal for his direction, support and
training. Thanks to Dr. James F. Lea for helping me with industrial approach towards this
thesis. I would also like to thank Dr. Paulus Adisoemarta for serving on my committee
and for his guidance.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ii

ABSTRACT

vi

LIST OF TABLES

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

viii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

xii

CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION

1

1.1

Background Information

1

1.2

Use of Compressibility Factors in Engineering Analysis

2

1.2.1

Z-Factor for Sour and Acid Gases

2

1.2.2

Z-Factor for Geologic CO2 Storage

2

1.3

Significance of the Project

3

1.4

Objective of the Project

4

2. COMPRESSIBILITY FACTOR PREDICTION TECHNIQUES

5

2.1

Theoretical Analysis of Gas Law-Based Z-Factors

5

2.2

Experimental Method for Compressibility Factors

5

2.3

Empirical Correlation Methods

5

2.3.1

Standing-Katz Compressibility Factor Chart

5

2.3.2

Hall-Yarborough Z-Factor Correlation

6

2.3.3

Wichert -Aziz Z-Factor Correlation

7

2.3.4

Dranchuk-Abou-Kassem Z-Factor Correlation

7

2.3.5

Beggs-Brill Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart

8

2.3.6

Amoco Company Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart

9

2.3.7

Gopal Best-Fit Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart

9

2.3.8

Shell Oil Company Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart

10

2.3.9

Physical Properties of C7+ Fractions Correlations

11

iii

3 Pseudocritical Gas Gravity Correlation Methods 33 3.1 Heptane-Plus Fraction Correlation Methods 25 3.3.7 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Reservoir Gases 45 4.4 Redlich-Kwong Equation of State 57 4.1 Selection of Cubic Equations-of-State 53 4.3 van der Waals Equation of State 56 4. Z-FACTOR PREDICTIONS FROM CUBIC EQUATIONS OF STATE 53 4.3. STANDING-KATZ Z-FACTOR CORRELATION 20 3.4 van der Waals Theory of Pseudocritical Methods 37 3.6 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Natural Gases 43 3.1 Design Procedure for Scaling Parameter 38 38 3.7 Schmidt-Wenzel Equation of State 62 4.2 Pseudocritical Mixing Parameter Methods 27 3.9 Trebble-Bishnoi Equation of State 65 iv .2 Best-Fit Equations for SK Z-Factor Chart 20 3.5 Improved Theory for Pseudocritical Mixture Parameter 37 3.3.1 Standing-Katz Representation of Z-Factor Chart 20 3.4 Designed Scaling Parameter for Standing-Katz Z-Factor Chart 3.3.6 Peng-Robinson Equation of State 61 4.5 Soave-Redlich-Kwong Equation of State 58 4.5 Equations of State Prediction Methods 19 3.4 Corresponding State Prediction Methods 12 2.4.5 Designed PR/Z Versus Z-Factor Chart 42 3.3 Mixture Critical Property Prediction Methods 23 3.8 Patel-Teja Equation of State 63 4.3.2.2 Lawal-Lake-Silberberg Equation of State 54 4.

FORTRAN PROGRAMS 174 v .10 Transformed Cubic Equations to the LLS EOS Form 66 4. Conclusions 94 5.15 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Natural Gases 77 4. 1 Results for Excelsior Laboratory Data 78 4.1. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 94 5. EXPERIMENTAL Z-FACTOR FOR MISCELLANEOUS GASES 137 F.4. PREDICTION OF Z-FACTOR FROM LLS EOS 171 G.13 Development of Binary Interaction Parameters 74 4.15.15. SCALING FACTOR DEVELOPMENT AND RESULTS 122 D. 5 Results for Elsharkawy Miscellaneous Data 90 5. PREDICTION RESULTS FOR PSEUDOCRITICAL PARAMETERS 117 C. PREDICTION OF Z-FACTOR FOR PURE SUBSTANCES 127 E. 3 Results for UCalgary Data 81 4.15. Recommendations 95 REFERENCES 96 APPENDICES 106 A. REDUCED FORM OF CUBIC EQUATIONS OF STATE 106 B.15.14 Prediction Results of Z-Factor of Mixtures 75 4. 2 Results for TTU Laboratory Data 80 4.15.2.12 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Pure Substances 71 4. 4 Results for Elsharkawy Gas Data 88 4.11 Generalized Reduced State of Cubic Equations-of-State 67 4.

Necessity arises when there is no available experimental data for the required composition. This developed adjustable parameter forms the basis for using LLS-EOS to be able to use S-K Chart to predict accurate z-factor values of pure substances and mixtures of gases regardless of the concentration of acid gases. Eight equations of state have been thoroughly examined and the results suggest that the Lawal-Lake-Silberberg (LLS-EOS) equation of state is capable of predicting zfactor values of both pure substances and mixtures of gases. In contrast to the existing methods derived from other equations of states (EOS methods) and S-K Chart (empirical methods). This equation of state method allows the determination of reduced temperature (TR) and reduced pressure (PR) instead of the pseudo-reduced temperature (TPR) and pseudo-reduced pressure (PPR) both for pure substances and mixtures of gases. pressure and temperature conditions. vi . A comparative z-factor prediction result of the various EOS methods for different gas samples is presented fortifying the capability of the LLS-EOS method. natural gases and sour reservoir gases regardless of the composition of the acid gases at all temperatures and pressures. this project provides a simple and universal technique for predicting z-factor values for pure substances. Presented here is a technique to predict z-factor values of pure substances. Another method of predicting z-factor values is based on the famous Standing-Katz (S-K) Chart (empirical methods). equations of state method and empirical correlations. Law of Corresponding States principle has formed the basis to develop a universal adjustable parameter. This EOS is robust and the results are accurate even if of acid gases present in high concentration.ABSTRACT Compressibility factor (z-factor) values of natural gases are necessary in most petroleum engineering calculations. The most common sources of z-factor values are experimental measurement. natural gases and sour reservoir gases.

137 vii . 25 3.1 Common Specialization Cubic Equation of State 66 4.2 36 Sources of Experimental Z-Factor for Pure Substances 3.1 Gas Composition Description. 90 B. 88 4. 118 E.6 Z-Factor Results for Miscellaneous Gases. 81 4.1 Coefficients of Cavett’s correlation. 10 3.LIST OF TABLES 2.4 Highly Sour Gas Composition (Elsharkawy) 46 3.5 Carbon Dioxide Rich Composition (Elsharkawy) 47 3.5 Results of Elsharkawy Gas Data. 78 4.1 UCalgary Z-Factor Data.6 Very Light Gas Composition (Elsharkawy) 48 3.3 Gas Composition Data for Excelsior 6 Laboratory Data.3 Rich Gas Condensate Composition (Elsharkawy) 45 3.7 Property Prediction for Gas Composition Data (Elsharkawy) 49 4.2 Sources of Experimental Z-Factor 77 4.1 Heavy Fraction Property Correlations.4 Gold Creek Gas Composition.

1 Comparison of Six Correlations for Pseudocritical Pressure Parameters. 40 3.LIST OF FIGURES 1.14 Scaled Z-Factor for Rich Gas Condensate Composition.55).12 Scaled Z-Factor for Very Light Gas Composition.3 Scaled Z-Factor for Buxton & Campbell Data (Mix-5) at 160 F.4 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1. 50 3. 25 2. 26 2.9 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.11 Scaled Z-Factor Buxton & Campbell.5 Scaled Z-Factor for Buxton and Campbell Data (Mix-5) at 100 oF. 35 Conditions(TR=0. 27 2.6 Scaled Z-Factor for Satter Data (Mix-E) at 160 oF.85). Mix-2 Result. @ T = 100 oF 44 3.13). Mix-3 Result. 35 3. 43 o 3.10 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=2.2 Compare of Six Correlations for Pseudocritical Temperature Parameters. 24 2.1 Critical compressibility factor for pure hydrocarbons (alkanes).65). 51 3. @ T = 100 oF 44 3.1 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced 2. 43 3.8 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.2 Z-Factor comparison for LLS-EOS for Carbon dioxide.5 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.7 SK Z-Chart Developed Based on Computation SK Technique.1 Z-Factor comparison for LLS-EOS for Methane. Mix-2 Result. o 22 3. 72 viii .15 Scaled Z-Factor for Highly Sour Gas Composition.98). 3 2. 40 3. 42 3.4 Scaled Z-Factor for Buxton and Campbell Data (Mix-5) at 130 oF. 26 2. 41 3.13 Scaled Z-Factor for Carbon Dioxide Rich Gas Composition. 71 4. 50 3.24). 25 2.8 Amount of gas produced.3 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=0. 27 3.07).6 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.9 Scaled Z-Factor Buxton & Campbell. @ T = 130 F.7 Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1. 24 2.02).10 Scaled Z-Factor Buxton & Campbell. 51 4.03). 41 3.

25 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 219 oF.13 75% CO2 .6 Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 49 F.5 Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-2). data from Excelsior 6 (FPP) at 581 oR. 85 4.19 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 50 oF. 75 4.21 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 125 oF.15 Z-Factor for sour natural gas.17 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 73 F. 73 4.18 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 198 oF.11 Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 90 oF (Simon et.).7 Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 70 oF.4. 82 o 4. 120 ix . Data from Excelsior 6 (FPP) at 581 oR.22 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 150 oF. 80 4.3 Z-Factor comparison for LLS-EOS for Nitrogen.23 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 175 F.4 Z-Factor comparison for vdW-EOS for Methane. 119 B. 82 4.4 Critical temperature prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-2). 80 4.8 Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 90 oF.16 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 84 oF.Dry Gas at 100 oF for CO2 Sequestration. 87 B. 85 o 4. 83 4.10 Z-Factor for Sweet Natural Gas. 72 4. al.12 Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 120 F (Simon et.Dry Gas at 160 oF for CO2 Sequestration.14 25% CO2 . 84 4. 84 4.26 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 250 oF.1 Critical temperature prediction for Gore Data (Mix 47-1). 79 o 4. 119 B.). 75 4. 86 4.5 Z-Factor comparison for vdW-EOS for Carbon dioxide. 73 o 4.9 Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 90 oF. 81 4. 86 4. al.3 Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-1).20 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 100 oF. 118 B. 76 4. 76 4. 79 4.24 Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 200 oF. 83 4. 87 4.2 Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 47-1). 120 B.

3 Z-Factor comparison for RK-EOS for Carbon dioxide. 127 D.13 Z-Factor comparison for SW-EOS for Nitrogen.12 Z-Factor comparison for SW-EOS for Carbon dioxide.2 Z-Factor comparison for RK-EOS for Methane.6 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 130 oF (Mix-2).16 Z-Factor comparison for PT-EOS for Nitrogen. 129 D. 130 D. 134 D.14 Z-Factor comparison for PT-EOS for Methane.11 Z-Factor comparison for SW-EOS for Methane. 129 D. 131 D.7 Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-3). 133 D.9 Z-Factor comparison for PR-EOS for Carbon dioxide. 132 D. 124 C. 127 D.18 Z-Factor comparison for TB-EOS for Carbon dioxide. 136 F.17 Z-Factor comparison for TB-EOS for Methane.1 Z-Factor comparison for vdW-EOS for Nitrogen. 133 D.2 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 130 F (Mix-4). 125 C.10 Z-Factor comparison for PR-EOS for Nitrogen. 128 D.B.15 Z-Factor comparison for PT-EOS for Carbon dioxide. 135 D. 135 D. 171 x . 128 D.19 Z-Factor comparison for TB-EOS for Nitrogen. 121 B.5 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 100 oF (Mix-3).8 Z-Factor comparison for PR-EOS for Methane. 126 D.7 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 160 oF (Mix-1).6 Z-Factor comparison for SRK-EOS for Carbon dioxide. o 123 C.4 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 130 oF (Mix-3).1 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 160 oF (Mix-4). 131 D. 123 C.7 Z-Factor comparison for SRK-EOS for Nitrogen.1 Z-factor for pure substances (Methane).3 Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 160 oF (Mix-3). 132 D. 121 C. 134 D.6 Critical temperature prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-3). 124 C.4 Z-Factor comparison for RK-EOS for Nitrogen.5 Z-Factor comparison for SRK-EOS for Methane. 125 C. 130 D.

5 Z-factor for pure substances (Nitrogen).F.3 Z-factor for pure substances (Carbon Dioxide).4 Z-factor for pure substances (Hydrogen Sulfide). 173 xi . 172 F. 172 F.2 Z-factor for pure substances (n-Decane). 171 F.

oR)) RK Redlick-Kwong SRK Soave-Redlich-Kwong xii .LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Symbol Definition a Attraction Parameter in EOS A ⎛ a (T ) P ⎞ Dimensionless Constant ⎜ 2 2 ⎟ ⎝R T ⎠ ACF Acentric Factor AF Acentric Factor API Oil Gravity b van der Waals co-volume B ⎛ bP ⎞ Dimensionless Constant ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ RT ⎠ BIN Binary Interaction Number BIP Binary Interaction Parameter EOS Equation of State G Gibbs Free Energy k Parameter of SRK EOS LLS Lawal-Lake-Silberberg m Parameter of SRK EOS Mw Molecular Weight Mw Molecular Weight p Pressure in psia P Pressure in psia PR Peng Robinson R Universal Gas Constant (10.73 psiD.ft3/ (lbmol.

j Component Identification 1. 2 Index for components 1 and 2 xiii .SW Schmidt-Wenzel t Inverse Absolute Temperature (1/T) T Absolute Temperature TB Trebble-Bishnoi V Volume in cubic feet vdW van der Waal x Mole Fraction z Compressibility Factor Z Compressibility Factor Greek Letter α Parameter of LLS EOS αij Binary Interaction Term β Parameter of LLS EOS Ω Dimensionless EOS Parameter ω Acentric Factor γg Specific Gravity Subscripts c Critical Property pr Pseudo Reduced Property Identification pc Pseudo Critical Property Identification r Reduced Property Identification m Mixture Definition R Reduced State i.

1 Background Information Compressibility Factor is a measure of the amount the gas deviates from perfect behavior. a value of z = 1 would represent an ideal gas condition. Under these above mentioned conditions. While. the gas tends to approach ideal behavior. In nature. represented as z (or) Z. Real Gas Law: PV = znRT (1.CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1. It is a dimensionless quantity and by definition the ratio of the volume actually occupied by a gas at a given pressure and temperature to the volume it would occupy if it behaved ideally. Therefore. ideal gases do not exist instead real gases exist. All molecules of real gases are under two kinds of forces: (a) to move apart from each other because of their constant kinetic motion. the molecules come very close to each other resulting in significant attractive forces.1). the molecules are quite far apart and the attractive forces are negligible and same is the condition at high temperatures because of the greater kinetic motion.2). z= Va Actual volume of n moles of gas at T and p = Vi Ideal volume of n moles at same T and p The kinetic theory of gases (basis for Ideal gas law) assumes that there are neither attractive forces nor repulsive forces between the gas molecules. and (b) to come together because of electrical attractive forces between the molecules. 1 . It is more commonly called as the gas deviation factor. at high pressures. At normal conditions. These theories qualitatively explain the behavior of nonideal (real) gases and a general representation of the gas law is as follows: Ideal Gas Law: PV = nRT (1.

Knowledge of accurate critical z-factor value for pure substances and mixtures is essential in the determination of accurate z-factor values. pipeline design. CO2 gas in various concentrations can be required to be stored.1 illustrates the capability of various equations-ofstates in predicting critical compressibility factor values. and material balance calculations. Figure 1. Some of the petroleum engineering applications which involve use of z-factor values of gases are as follows: 1. 1. gas flow rate.2. estimating reserves.2 Use of Compressibility Factors in Engineering Analysis Accurate information of compressibility factor values is necessary in engineering applications like gas metering.1 Z-Factor for Sour and Acid Gases If hydrogen sulfide is present in a natural gas mixture it is termed as sour natural gas. A method to capture CO2 from the atmosphere or other sources of CO2 production and be able to store it into abandoned wells is called as CO2 sequestration. The existing methods of calculating z-factor values when significant amounts of acid gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) are present in the natural gas mixtures incur high deviations from the actual values.1.2. Critical z-factor is unique for each component and system.2 Z-Factor for Geologic CO2 Storage A high content of CO2 gas present in the atmosphere is the major cause for global warming. 2 . Engineering this method needs z-factor values.

30 PT Twu 0.36 0. more importantly. it becomes a necessity to have a simple and robust technique to be able to determine z-factor values accurately. 3 . As more and more.28 TB EXP LLS 0.1: Critical compressibility factor for pure hydrocarbons (alkanes).32 PR SW 0.26 0. This project presents methods that allow accurate determination of z-factor values both for pure components and gas mixtures including significant amounts of non-hydrocarbon components for all ranges of pressures and temperatures.3 Significance of the Project Today’s standard treatment of phase behavior in reservoir simulation is still based on formation volume factors (FVF’s) and surface gas/oil ratios (GOR’s) which requires the determination of z-factor and critical properties of mixtures.34 RK 0. sour environment reservoirs are discovered. 1.38 VDW Critical Compressibility Factor 0.24 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 Pure Substances C7 C8 C9 C10 Figure 1.0.

4 Objective of the Project This research project provides improved predictive techniques for z-factors based on the approaches of cubic Equations-of-State (EOS) and empirical correlation of Standing-Katz5 Chart. The experimental z-factors data for 3100 gas samples. including highly sour gases (H2S). Eight EOS that are routinely used in reservoir calculations and improved pseudocritical property methods for Standing & Katz (SK) Chart are utilized to match experimentally determined z-factors for pure substances. 4 . natural and sour reservoir gases.1. acid gases (CO2 and N2) and rich gas condensates (with significant amount of C7+) are used to establish the improved predictive techniques for z-factors.

This forms the basis for the real gas law and is represented as: pV = zRT (1. Numerous equations-of-state have been developed in the attempt to correlate the pressure-temperature-volume variables for real gases with experimental data. z-factor must be introduced into the ideal gas equation to account for the departure of gases from ideality. this method is expensive and most of the time these measurements are made at reservoir temperatures only.1 Theoretical Analysis of Gas Law-Based Z-Factors The magnitude of deviation of real gases from the conditions of the ideal gas law increases with increasing pressure and temperature and varies widely with the composition of the gas. 2. experimental measurement is one of the most accurate methods. To account for this deviation factor (z-factor).CHAPTER 2 COMPRESSIBILITY FACTOR PREDICTION TECHNIQUES 2.3 Empirical Correlations Methods 2. At the same time. numerous equations-of-state have been proposed.3. It is hard to determine experimentally measured z-factor values for all compositions of gases at all ranges of pressures and temperatures. In order to express a more exact relationship between the variables p. 2.1 Standing-Katz Compressibility Factor Chart Standing and Katz5 presented a generalized z-factor chart.2 Experimental Method for Compressibility Factors Among the existing method of determination of z-factors.2). and T. To be able to 5 . which has become an industry standard for predicting the volumetric behavior of natural gases. V.

Numerous methods have been suggested to predict pseudocritical properties of the gases as a function of their specific gravity. 2.1).06125p pr T − 1.2 Hall-Yarborough Z-Factor Correlation Hall and Yarborough8 (1973) presented an equation-of-state that accurately determined the Standing and Katz z-factor chart. critical pressure and critical temperature of the system).76t 2 4. . The point to be noted here is that these methods predict pseudo critical values which are evidently not accurate values of the gas mixtures. Best fit mathematical expressions were determined based on the data taken from Standing and Katz z-factor chart.use this chart.76t − 9. Improved technique to predict critical properties have been discussed in the Chapter 3 of this thesis report. where pPR = pseudo-reduced pressure ⎛ Tpc ⎞ ⎟⎟ t = reciprocal of the pseudo-reduced temperature ⎜⎜ = T ⎝ ⎠ [ ] F(Y) = −0.2(1 − t ) Y ⎣ ⎦ ] (2. 6 (2. The mathematical form of the equation is: [ ⎡ 0.58t 3 Y 2 + 90.4t 3 Y (2.2(1 − t ) + ( 2 ) ( Y + Y2 + Y3 − Y4 (1 − Y )3 ) − 14. This is based on the Starling-Carnahan21 equation-of-state.18+ 2. which further needs determination of critical properties (namely. The existing methods fail to predict accurate values of pseudocritical values when non-hydrocarbon components are present in significant amounts.3.2t 2 + 42.7 t − 242.06125p pr t ⎤ 2 Z=⎢ ⎥ EXP − 1.82 t ) = 0 Hall and Yarborough pointed out that the method is not recommended for application if the pseudo-reduced temperature is less than one.2). knowledge of reduced temperature and reduced pressure are required.

5). The equation is as follows: 7 . oR p pc = corrected pseudo-critical pressure. Wichert and Aziz22 (1972) developed a calculation procedure to account for these differences.2.0 ) (2.9 − A 1. psia B = mole fraction of H2S in the gas mixture ε = pseudo-critical temperature adjustment factor and is defined mathematically by the following expression ( ) ( ε = 120 A 0. where the coefficient A is the sum of the mole fraction of H2S and CO2 in the gas mixture.5 − B 4.6).3.4 Dranchuk-Abu-Kassem Z-Factor Correlation Dranchuk and Abu-Kassem23 (1975) proposed an eleven-constant equation-ofstate for calculating the gas compressibility factors.3.3 Wichert-Aziz Z-Factor Correlation Sour natural gases (containing H2S) and/or CO2 frequently exhibit different compressibility factor behavior than do sweet natural gases. 2. psia Tpc′ = corrected pseudo-critical temperature. This correction factor is then used to adjust the pseudo-critical temperature and pressure according to the following expressions: Tpc′ = Tpc − ε p′pc = where (2. Tpc = pseudo-critical temperature.4). Wichert and Aziz developed a pseudo-critcal temperature adjustment factor which is a function of the concentration of CO2 and H2S in the sour gas. oR ppc = pseudo-critical pressure.3). p pc Tpc′ Tpc + B(1 − B)ε (2. or A = y H 2S + y CO 2 (2.9 + 15 B 0.

39(Tpr − 0.8).2 ≤ p pr < 30 1.3262 A2 = -1.01569 A5 = -0. The coefficients values: A1 = 0.101 8 . to 1.36Tpr − 0. where A = 1. The constants A1 through A11 were determined by fitting the equation.92) 0.1056 A10 = 0.1884 A9 = 0.6134 A11 = 0. 2. where ρ r = reduced gas density and is defined by the following relationship: ρr = 0.0 with an average absolute error of 0.5 Beggs-Brill Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart Beggs and Brill25 (1973) proposed a best-fit equation for the Standing and Katz zfactor chart and is as follows: z=A+ (1 − A ) + Cp D pr eB (2.7210 This method is applicable over the ranges 0.⎡ A A ⎤ A z = ⎢A 1 + 2 + 33 + 55 ⎥ρ r Tpr Tpr Tpr ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎡A ⎡ A ⎤ A A ⎤ + ⎢A 6 + 7 + 28 ⎥ρ 2r − A 9 ⎢ 7 + 28 ⎥ρ 5r Tpr Tpr ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ Tpr Tpr ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ρ2 + A 10 1 + A 11ρ 2r 3r EXP − A 11ρ 2r + 1 Tpr ( [ ) ] (2.0 < Tpr ≤ 3.585 percent.500 points from the Standing and Katz z-factor chart.5 − 0.27p pr zTpr (2.7).7361 A8 = 0.9).5475 A7 = -0.3.0700 A3 = -0.05165 A6 = 0. using nonlinear regression models.5339 A4 = 0.

82 t ) = 0 (2. For various Tr values.⎡ 0. several z-factor values were tabulated isobarically for Pr up to 5.4 because.4t 3 Y (2. It should be noted that this method is not recommended for application if the pseudo-reduced temperature is less than one.2(1 − t ) + ( 2 ) ( Y + Y2 + Y3 − Y4 (1 − Y )3 ) − 14.7 Gopal Best-Fit Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart Gopal’s33 correlation for z-factor estimation was developed by dividing the Standing-Katz chart into two parts by drawing a line isobarically for PR up to 5.2(1 − t ) Y ⎣ ⎦ ] (2.32 log (Tpr )) D = 10 (0.3016 −0.86 ) ⎦⎥ C = (0. 2. the z-factor values show a uniform trend. 2.7 t − 242. where ppr = pseudo-reduced pressure ⎛ Tpc ⎞ ⎟⎟ t = reciprocal of the pseudo-reduced temperature ⎜⎜ = ⎝ T ⎠ [ ] F(Y) = −0.32 − 0.066 ⎤ 0.3.4.92.06125p pr t ⎤ 2 Z=⎢ ⎥ EXP − 1.76t − 9. for any Pr.3.10).23Tpr )p pr + ⎢ 10 ⎣⎢ (Tpr − 0..06125p pr T − 1.62 − 0.2t 2 + 42.76t 2 4.037⎥ p 2pr + 9 (Tpr −1) p 6pr B = (0.11). His objective was to come 9 .58t 3 Y 2 + 90.49 T 2 pr + 0.132 − 0.1824 Tpr ) This method is cannot be used for reduced temperature ( Tpr ) values less than 0.6 Amoco Company Equation for SK Z-Factor Chart Amoco Company uses the Hall and Yarborough z-factor determination method and can be defined as follows: [ ⎡ 0.18+ 2.

101 − 0. 2. one for Pr less than or equal to 5. A general equation was developed and is of the form: Z = Pr (ATr + B ) + CTr + D (2.0657 − 0. and the other for Pr greater than 5.up with two noniterative equations.4. harmonic equations are suggested to be a good fit.4.86) ZE = 0.021 + 0.3 × (Tpr − 1)) ZG = p pr * ( ZC + ZD × p pr + ZE × p 4pr ) 10 ⎞ ⎟⎟ ⎠ 4 (2.122 × EXP ( −11.32 × EXP (−19.919) ZB = 0.04275 (Tpr − 0. ZA = −0.037 (Tpr − 0. For Pr greater than 5. B.6222 − 0.13).53 × (Tpr − 1)) ZF = 0. The values of constants A. and D for various combinations of PR and TR are available in the reference33.12).65) ZC = 0.36 × Tpr + 1.224 × Tpr ZD = 0.4. C. . To describe the chart accurately.8 Shell Oil Company Equation for Z-Factor Chart ⎛ p pr Z = ZA + ZB × p pr + (1 − ZA) × EXP(− ZG) − ZF × ⎜⎜ ⎝ 10 where.3. the chart was further divided into 12 parts24.3868 × (Tpr − 0.

947221 Tc 6.5790E-13 -1.361 Ωw = (1 + 0.12621158 0.755309 -1.374444 -2.802538 ω 1.883921 2.5 131.059607 0.224357 0.375ω ) (1 + 0.206640 -0.22065E-10 -0.9 MW API = SG = 141.000000 Pc 237031780 -0.45908 -2.25373 3.9 Physical Properties of C7+ Fractions Correlation Table 2.09255911 -0.4452 0.811708 4. 6084 + 5 .1: Heavy Fraction Property Correlations.453063 -2.3.000000 0.5 + API ( ) Tbp o R = e 0 MW e1 SG C = e 0 MW 1 SG 2 Tbpe3 e e2 e p c .109476 ω 2.028484 2.0274ω ) Parameters Property e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 Tbp 108.0413045 0.2.83282122 0.701661 0.42244800 0. ( psi) = e 0 MW 1 SG 2 Tbpe3 C e 4 e ( ) e Tc o R = e 0 MW 1 SG 2 Tbpe 3 Ce 4 e e ω = e 0 MW 1 SG 2 Tbpe3 C e 4 e Zc = e 0.968332 -0.293 0.42682558 0.000000 C 0.000000 11 .

Mathematically.18). when viewed in terms of reduced pressure. Pc Vc = PV zRT = z c Tc Pc Vc z c Tc (2.15).2. this principle can be defined as: z = z c Ψ (p R . The mathematical derivation of the above expression is as follows: Real gas law is. By definition PR = P T & TR = Pc Tc = PR VR = (2.22).4 Corresponding States Prediction Methods The theory of Corresponding States proposes that all gases will exhibit the same behavior. z c Tc 1 = Pc Vc R = PR VR = = z = zc (2.19). z-factor.14). Multiply and divide the LHS of the above equation by Pc Vc and RHS by zcTc. PV = zRT (2. e. we have from real gas law.16). TR ) (2. z z c Tc TR z c Pc Vc (2. reduced volume.g. we get. z PR VR z c TR (2. and reduced temperature. Based on the above derivation.21). 12 . T T PV = zR c Pc Vc Pc Vc Tc (2. TR PR VR z = z c Ψ (p R . TR ) (2.20). the following relationship can be established.17).

23). 5 C om pressibility Factor 4 3 Exp nC7 nC9 nC10 vdW SRK LLS PT PR TR = 0.65).65 2 1 0 0 5 10 15 20 Reduced Pressure Figure 2. 13 25 30 .p R1 VR1 p R 2 VR 2 = Z R1TR1 Z R 2 TR 2 (2.1: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=0.

75 2 1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.5 C om pressibility Factor 4 3 Exp nC4 nC5 nC6 nC9 vdW SRK LLS PT PR TR = 0.2: Z-Factors of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR = 0.75). 14 30 .

4 Exp CO2 H2S C2 C3 nC5 vdW SRK LLS PT PR 1 TR = 1.Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=0.4: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.02 0.85 1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.8 1.02). Compressibility Factor 1. 15 16 .2 0 4 8 12 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.3: Z.6 0.5 Exp C3 iC4 nC4 nC5 nC6 nC7 nC9 nC10 vdW SRK LLS PT PR Compressibility Factor 4 3 2 TR = 0.85).

05 TR = 1.2.6: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.19 TR = 1.5: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.47 Exp CO2 H2S C2 C3 nC4 iC4 vdW SRK LLS PT PR 1.03 Compressibility Factor 1.63 0.13 0.07).25 0 5 10 15 20 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.25 Compressibility Factor 1.13).07 0. 16 20 .65 0. 2.35 0 5 10 15 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.91 0.45 Exp C2 C3 nC4 iC4 nC5 vdW SRK LLS PT PR 1.85 1.75 1.

55).55 Exp CO2 H2S C2 C3 nC4 iC4 vdW SRK LLS PT PR 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.2 TR = 1.Compressibility Factor 1.85 0.31 Exp CO2 C1 C2 C3 vdW SRK LLS PT PR TR = 1.55 0. Compressibility Factor 1.8: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.24 0. 17 20 .98 0.24).7: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1.9 1.65 0 5 10 15 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.64 1.

88 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.98).Compressibility Factor 1.45 Exp N2 C1 vdW SRK LLS PT PR TR = 2.18 0.36 Exp 1.60 1.90 0 5 10 15 20 Reduced Pressure Figure 2.12 CO2 C1 C2 vdW SRK LLS PT PR TR = 1.03).10: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=2.98 0.03 1.73 1.9: Z-Factor of Pure Substances at Reduced Conditions (TR=1. Compressibility Factor 2.00 1. 18 25 30 .

and temperature (PVT). volume. such as low-temperature CO2 flooding. and even water-/hydrocarbon-phase behavior can be predicted accurately with a cubic EOS. Multiple phase behavior. temperature. 19 . Chapter 4 presents a detailed use of equations-of-state method for solving zfactors. usually expressed in terms of z = pV . requiring only critical properties and acentric factor of each component. where constants A0.2. They accurately describe the volumetric and phase behavior of pure compounds and mixtures.5 Equations of State Prediction Methods Cubic equations of state (EOS’s) are simple equations relating pressure. RT z 3 + A 2 z + A1z + A 0 = 0 (2. Volumetric behavior is calculated by solving the simple cubic equation.24). and phase composition. The same equation is used to calculate the properties of all phases. A1. can be treated with an EOS. and A2 are functions of pressure. thereby ensuring consistency in reservoir processes that approach critical conditions.

06125p pr t ⎤ 2 Z=⎢ ⎥ exp − 1.2 t 2 + 42. 3.2 Best-Fit Equations for SK Z-Factor Chart Many empirical equations and EOSs have been fit to the original Standing-Katz zfactor chart.76 t − 9.2).18+ 2. To be able to predict z-factor using the SK chart requires the appropriate reduced temperature and pressure.1) where ppr = pseudo-reduced pressure ⎛ Tpc ⎞ ⎟⎟ t = reciprocal of the pseudo-reduced temperature ⎜⎜ = T ⎠ ⎝ [ ] F(Y) = −0. Some of the commonly used methods in the petroleum industry are: Hall & Yarborough11 Best Fit Equation: [ ⎡ 0.2(1 − t ) + ( 2 ) ( Y + Y2 + Y3 − Y4 (1 − Y )3 ) − 14.CHAPTER 3 STANDING-KATZ Z-FACTOR CORRELATION 3. . A close study and comparison of the experimental data with that of SK chart z-factor values suggests that the SK chart was developed based on the natural gas mixture without any significant amounts of non-hydrocarbon components and C7+ in it.82 t ) = 0 20 (3.4 t 3 Y (2.76 t 2 4.1 Standing-Katz Representation of Z-Factor Chart The z-factor in the Standing and Katz5 (SK) chart is a function of reduced pressure and temperature.06125p pr T − 1. Information on the composition of the gas used to design the Standing-Katz z-factor chart is not provided.58t 3 Y 2 + 90.2(1 − t ) Y ⎦ ⎣ ] (3.7 t − 242.

7361 A8 = 0.27p pr zTpr The constants A1 through A11 were determined by fitting the equation.6134 A11 = 0.23Tpr )p pr + ⎢ − 0. to 1.037⎥ p 2pr + 9 (Tpr −1) p 6pr 10 ⎢⎣ Tpr − 0.92) 0.3262 A2 = -1.5339 A4 = 0.1884 A9 = 0.39(Tpr − 0.32 B = (0.86 ⎥⎦ ( ) C = (0.1056 A10 = 0. The coefficients values: A1 = 0.4) where ρ r = reduced gas density and is defined by the following relationship: ρr = 0.1824 Tpr ) Dranchuk-Abu-Kassem23 Best-Fit Equation: ⎡ A A ⎤ A z = ⎢ A1 + 2 + 33 + 55 ⎥ ρ r T pr T pr T pr ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎡ ⎡A A A ⎤ A ⎤ + ⎢ A6 + 7 + 28 ⎥ ρ r2 − A9 ⎢ 7 + 28 ⎥ ρ r5 T pr T pr ⎥⎦ ⎣⎢ ⎣⎢ T pr T pr ⎥⎦ ( + A10 1 + A11 ρ r2 )ρ T 2 r 3 pr [ ] EXP − A11 ρ r2 + 1 (3.49T 2 pr + 0.500 points from the Standing and Katz z-factor chart.5 − 0.3016−0.05165 A6 = 0.066 ⎤ 0.3) where A = 1.62 − 0.101 ⎡ 0.7210 Dranchuk-Purvis-Robinson Method: 21 .0700 A3 = -0.32 log(Tpr )) D = 10 (0.5475 A7 = -0.Beggs-Brill25 Best-Fit Equation: z=A+ (1 − A ) + Cp D pr eB (3.132 − 0.36Tpr − 0. using non-linear regression models.01569 A5 = -0.

The correlation is.0 0.27p pr ZTpr (3. Purvis.05 ≤ Tpr < 3.101 − 0. It consists of eight coefficients which were obtained based on a best-fit of 1500 data points from Standing-Katz Z-factor chart.53530771 A5 = -0.5) and the coefficients A1 to A8 have the following values: A1 = 0.Dranchuk.32 × exp(−19.3868 × (TR − 0.0467099 A3 = -0.224 × TR ZD = 0.68157001 A8 = 0.919) ZB = 0.10488813 A7 = 0.57832729 A4 = 0.53 × (TR − 1)) 22 4 (3.0657 − 0.36 × TR + 1. and Robinson’s (1974) correlation was developed based on Benedict-Webb-Rubin57 type of equation of state. ZA = −0. ⎡ ⎡A A ⎤ ⎡ A ⎤ A ⎤ A Z = 1 + ⎢A 1 + 2 + 33 ⎥ρ r + ⎢A 4 + 5 ⎥ρ 2r + ⎢ 5 6 ⎥ρ 5r Tpr Tpr ⎥⎦ Tpr ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ Tpr ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎢⎣ ⎡A ⎤ + ⎢ 37 ρ 2r (1 + A 8 ρ 2r )EXP(− A 8 ρ 2r )⎥ ⎣⎢ Tpr ⎦⎥ where ρ r = 0.61232032 A6 = -0. Shell Oil Company Best-Fit Equation: ⎛ p pr ⎞ ⎟⎟ Z = ZA + ZB × p pr + (1 − ZA) × exp(− ZG) − ZF × ⎜⎜ ⎝ 10 ⎠ where.04275 (TR − 0.021 + 0.0 .037 (TR − 0.86) ZE = 0.6) .6222 − 0.2 ≤ Ppr ≤ 3.68446549 This method is valid with in a temperature and pressure range of: 1.31506237 A2 = -1.65) ZC = 0.

The parameters going into the Equations 3.122 × exp(−11.9) where φ3 = 8 + 12α m + 6α 2m + α 3m φ2 = 15 + 15α m − 27βm − 3α 2m φ1 = 6 + 3α m φ0 = −1 Similarly.8). reduced temperature and a fixed range of composition of gases (in Chapter 2 is discussed the procedure to calculate properties of C7+).7) Tc = Bc am 2 b m R[3Z c + (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c ] (3.7 and 3.ZF = 0. the expression for Zc (critical Z for mixtures) in terms of αm and βm are shown in Equations 3.7 and 3. The expressions for mixture critical point (Pc and Tc) are established in the following equations: Pc = B c2 am b 2m [3Z c2 + (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c ] (3.3 Mixture Critical Property Prediction Methods Numerous correlations and methods have been suggested in the past to predict mixture critical properties.8 is obtained by solving the following cubic equation: 23 . each of the correlations are designed for a limited reduced pressure. This calls for a need to have a generalized method to calculate mixture critical properties and presented here is a generalized method to calculated pure component and mixture critical properties.3 × (TR − 1)) ZG = PR * ( ZC + ZD × PR + ZE × PR4 ) 3. In most cases.8 are calculated as shown below: The critical equation-of-state parameter Bc is obtained by solving the following cubic equation: φ 3 B 3c + φ 2 B c2 + φ1 B c + φ 0 = 0 (3. These methods predict pseudocritical properties and do not represent a correct estimation of the properties for various ranges of composition.

361 Ωw = 1 + 0.12).θ 3 Z 3c + θ 2 Z c2 + θ1 Z c + θ 0 = 0 (3.11) i =1 j=1 ⎛ n ⎞ b m = ⎜ ∑ x i b1i / 3 ⎟ ⎝ i =1 ⎠ n 3 (3.19708+ 0. bm.15) where θ = 0.35714ω + 3.16) 1 + Ω w Z c − 3Z c α= Ω w Zc β= (3. The temperature function essential in the determination of the mixture equation of i =1 j=1 state parameter (attractive term ‘a’) is defined as: 2 2 R 2 Tc2 3 R Tc = [1 + (Ω w − 1) Z c ] TR−θ a (T ) = Ω a Pc Pc (3. αm and βm are prescribed as n n a m = ∑∑ x i x j a (T )1i / 2 a (T )1j / 2 a ij (3.19).14).18) 0.13) i =1 j=1 n n β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ1i / 2β1j / 2β ij (3.17) Z (Ω w − 1) + 2Ω Z + (1 − 3Z c )Ω w Ω Z 2 c 3 2 w c 2 w c (3.59015e − 03ωMw .0274ω (3.10) where θ 3 = 8 + 12α m + 6α 2m + α 3m θ 2 = − (3 + 12α m + 12α 2m + 9β m − 9α m β m ) θ1 = 3α m + 6α 2m + 6β m − 6α m β m θ 0 = − (α 2m + β m − α m β m ) where the mixture parameters am. 24 . n α m = ∑∑ x i x j α 1i / 2 α 1j / 2 α ij (3. 2 The pure component parameters are defined as follows: b = Ωb RTc RTc = Ω w Zc Pc Pc (3.08627ω + 0.

It should be noted that only the commonly used correlations are mentioned.20876110*10-4 4 0.30474749*10-5 3 -0.32711600*10-7 -0. I ai bi 0 768.38890584*10-6 0.1 Heptane-Plus Fraction Correlation Methods Cavett’s Correlation: Cavett (1962) proposed correlations for estimating the critical pressure and temperature of hydrocarbon fractions.11047899*10-7 6 0.07121 2.13949619*10-9 25 .0010834003 -0.8290406 1 1.20) + a 5 (API)(Tb ) 2 + a 6 (API) 2 (Tb ) 2 Log(p c ) = b 0 + b1 (Tb ) + b 2 (Tb ) 2 + b 3 (API)(Tb ) + b 4 (Tb ) 3 (3.48271599*10-7 7 - 0. Tc = a 0 + a 1Tb + a 2 Tb2 + a 3 (API)(Tb ) + a 4 (Tb ) 3 (3.0089212579 -0. 3.1: Coefficients of Cavett’s correlation.A brief description of the previously used empirical correlations suggested is given in the following paragraphs.53094290*10-5 0.7133693 0.3.94120109*10-3 2 -0.21).15184103*10-8 5 0. + b 5 (API)(Tb ) 2 + b 6 (API) 2 (Tb ) + b 7 (Tb ) 2 The coefficients in the above equations are tabulated below: Table 3.

77084 γ g − 0.648 0.47227 ⎞ −7 2 ⎛ 1.8828 − T b ⎝ ⎠ Tb ( ) ( ) (3.04614 (3.7 + 811.9371 (3.1174γ g )Tb + (0.4350476 × 10 −5 Tb2.11857 ⎞ −3 ⎟10 Tb − ⎜⎜ 0.42019 + + ⎜⎜1.4853 [ Tc = exp 3.1γ g + (0. acentric factor.02226γ g ⎜1.22) Critical Temperature: 105 Tc = 341. and molecular weight as follows: p c = 3.3776 γ g−0.24244 + + γ γ γ 2 ⎟⎠ ⎝ ⎛ 3.3287 γ g )Tb ⎛ 720.79 ⎞ 10 7 ⎟ + 1 − 0. Critical Pressure: ln ( p c ) = 8.6 + 9486.994718Tb0. Winn-Sim-Daubert Correlation: Sim and Daubert (1980) represented the critical pressure.6523 − 3. critical temperature.6977 ⎞ −10 3 ⎟10 Tb ⎟⎟10 Tb − ⎜⎜ 0.4 γ g + (4.4669 − 3.27) where Tb is the boiling point in oR. critical pressure.08615 γ 0g.26) M w = 1. 26 .4685 + + 2 γ γ γ 2 ⎟⎠ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ (3.3634 − 0.0566 ⎛ 2.3437 − Tb ⎟⎠ Tb ⎝ 181.98 ⎞ 1012 2 ⎛ ⎜ ⎟⎟ 3 + 1 − 0.26238γ g ) Tb (3.24).4244 + 0.3177 γ g2.02058γ g2 ⎜⎜1.48242 × 109 Tb−2.25) ] (3.Kesler-Lee Correlations: Kesler and Lee (1976) proposed a set of equations to estimate the critical temperature.2898 0. and molecular weight of petroleum fractions.80882 γ g + 0.23) Molecular Weight: M W = −12272.

281826667⎜⎜ Mw ⎝ Mw ⎠ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 2 ⎞ ⎛ T ⎥⎛ 5Tb ⎞ ⎢ ω = ⎢0.1750γ g2 − 13.01617283⎜ ⎜V ⎝ c ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 0.28) 1 1 M w ⎡0.061061γ g 3 − 0.904 −4 ⎟⎟ + + ⎥ ⎢5.2 Pseudocritical Mixing Parameters Methods Empirical Methods Gpc = Gideal + Gexcess (3. Critical Temperature: ln(Tc ) = −0.12027778 × 10 − 4 Tb M w + 0.3.00255452 Tb ⎥ w g w ⎢ Mw γ g2 ⎥⎦ ⎣ (3.1236667 × 10 Tb + 0.175γ 3g (3.Watansiri-Owens-Starling Correlation Watansiri (1985) developed a set of correlations to estimate the critical properties and acentric factor of coal compounds and other hydrocarbons and their derivatives.1958 ln(γ g ) Critical Pressure: ⎛ Tc ln(P c ) = 6.001261γ g M w ⎥⎜⎜ 9M ⎟⎟ ⎜γ ⎟ w ⎠ g ⎠ ⎝ ⎥⎝ ⎢ 1 2 ⎥ ⎢ 3 3 ⎢+ 0.313887 − 129.0005217Tb + 0.03905 ln(M w ) + 1.016943γ g ⎤ ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦ Critical Volume: ln(Vc ) = 76.2061 × 10− 4 γ M 2 − 66.1265 × 10− 4 M 2 + 0.32) 27 .074691 × 10− 5 ⎜ b ⎟ − 0.11067 ln(Tb ) (3.08843889⎜ b ⎟ ⎜M ⎠ ⎝ w ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (3.0650504 − 0.29) + 1.31) 3.10108 ln(M w ) + 42.29959 Tb − 0.712⎜ ⎜ T ⎝ c ⎞ ⎛ T ⎟ − 0.078154γ g 2 − 0.8038γ g + 63.6418853 + 0.30) Acentric Factor: ⎤ ⎡ ⎛ Tb ⎞ 382.8 ⎛Mw − 8.

Ppc = ∑ x i Pci + ∑ Φ i (Pci (IDEAL) x i ) (3.35) i Joffe Method64 (1947) ⎛T ⎞ ⎛ T ⎞ n ⎜ pc ⎟ = x ∑i i ⎜⎜ 1c2 ⎟⎟ ⎜⎜ 12 ⎟⎟ ⎝ Pc ⎠ i ⎝ Ppc ⎠ m ⎛ Tpc ⎜ ⎜P ⎝ pc ⎡⎛ ⎞ 1 n n ⎟ = ∑∑ x i x j ⎢⎜ Tc ⎟ 8 i j ⎢⎜⎝ Pc ⎠ ⎣ (3.34) i n Tpc = ∑ x i Tci (3.38) i =1 ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎜ ∑ x i Z ci ⎟R ⎜ ∑ x i Tci ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ i =1 ⎠ Ppc = ⎝ i =1 n ⎛ ⎞ ⎜ ∑ x i Vci ⎟ ⎝ i =1 ⎠ n n (3.36) 1 1 ⎞ 3 ⎛ Tc ⎞ 3 ⎤ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥⎦ ⎠i 3 (3.33) n i =1 n i =1 Kay’s Rule (1936) n Ppc = ∑ x i Pci (3.37) Prausnitz-Gunn (1958) n Tpc = ∑ x i Tci (3.39) Stewart-Burkhardt-Voo Method61 (1959) Tpc = ⎡ c ⎛ T ⎢∑ x i ⎜ c ⎜ 12 ⎢ i ⎝ Pc ⎣ 1 c ⎛ Tc ∑ x i ⎜⎜ P 3 i ⎝ c ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎠i ⎦ 2 ⎞ 2 ⎡ nc ⎛ Tc ⎟⎟ + ⎢∑ x i ⎜⎜ ⎠ i 3 ⎢⎣ i ⎝ Pc ⎞ 2⎤ ⎟ ⎥ ⎟ ⎥ ⎠i ⎦ 1 2 (3.33) Tpc = ∑ x i Tci + ∑ Φ i (Tci (IDEAL) x i ) (3.40) 28 .

42) (3.75⎢ ni ⎢ xP ⎥ i ci ⎥ ⎢⎣ ∑ i ⎦ (3.45).43) (3.Ppc = ⎡ nc ⎛ T ⎢∑ x i ⎜ c ⎜ 12 ⎢ i ⎝ Pc ⎣ ⎡ nc ⎢ 1 x ⎛⎜ Tc i⎜ ⎢3 ∑ ⎝ Pc ⎢⎣ i ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎠i ⎦ 2 ⎞ 2 ⎡ nc ⎛ Tc ⎟⎟ + ⎢∑ x i ⎜⎜ ⎠ i 3 ⎢⎣ i ⎝ Pc 1 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠i 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 2 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥⎦ 2 (3.44 γ = −0.41) Leland-Mueller Method (1959) 1/ 3 1/ 3 3 ⎤ ⎡ n n ⎡ ⎤ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ Z T Z T 1 1 γ/2 c c c c ⎢ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎥ ⎥ + x x T T i j ci c j ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ∑∑ 2 ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥ ⎥ ⎢⎣ 2 ⎝ Pc ⎠ i i j ⎦ ⎥ ⎢ Tpc = 3 ⎢ ⎥ n n ⎡ 1 ⎛ Z T ⎞1 / 3 1 ⎛ Z T ⎞1 / 3 ⎤ c c c c ⎢ ⎥ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ x i x j ⎢ ⎜⎜ ∑∑ ⎢ ⎥ 2 P 2 P ⎢⎣ ⎝ c ⎠ i i j ⎝ c ⎠ j ⎥⎦ ⎣ ⎦ [ ] 1/ γ ⎤ ⎡ n ⎥ ⎢ Tc ∑ x i Z ci ⎥ ⎢ i ⎥ Ppc = ⎢ 1/ 3 1/ 3 3 ⎥ ⎢ n n ⎡1 ⎛ Z T ⎞ 1⎛Z T ⎞ ⎤ ⎢ x i x j ⎢ ⎜⎜ c c ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ c c ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎥ ∑∑ ⎢ i j 2 ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥ ⎥ ⎢⎣ 2 ⎝ Pc ⎠ i ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ where ⎤ ⎡ n ⎢ P∑ x i (Tc )i ⎥ ⎥ γ = Ψ ⎢ i =n1 ⎢ T x (P ) ⎥ i c i ⎥ ⎢⎣ ∑ i =1 ⎦ Leland and co-workers later reported the following relationship. Satter-Campbell Method46 (1963) n n 1 1 Tpc = ∑∑ x i x j Tci 2 Tcj 2 (3.46) i =1 i =1 29 . ⎤ ⎡ n ⎢ ∑ x i Tci ⎥ ⎥ + 2.44) (3.

43577Θ 6 ωi = 6 (3.92714 + 6.n Ppc = Tc ∑ x i Z ci i ⎡ ⎛Z T ⎢1 ⎜ c c x x ∑∑ i j ⎢ 2 ⎜⎝ Pc i =1 j=1 ⎣ n 1 ⎞ 3 1 ⎛ Z c Tc ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ 2 ⎝ Pc ⎠i n ⎞ 3⎤ ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎠ j ⎥⎦ 1 3 (3.52) −1 − ln Pc (atm) − 5. Lee-Kesler Method54 (1975) Z ci = 0.085ω)RTc Vc (3.53). n ∑ x x ⎛⎜⎝ V i j=1 n j 1 ci n + Vcj 3 ⎞⎟ ⎠ 1 3 ∑ ∑ x x ⎛⎜⎝ V i =1 j=1 i j 1 ci 3 3 + Vcj 3 ⎞⎟ ⎠ 1 (3.51) T Θ= b Tc (3.085ωi (3. n ω = ∑ x i ωi (3.50) 3 Tci Tcj (3.48) Z ci RTci Pci Vci = 1 n Vpc = ∑ 8 i =1 1 8Vc Tpc = (3.2518 − 15.09648Θ + 1.4721 ln Θ + 0.2905 − 0.49).169347Θ 15.54) i =1 Ppc = (0.28862 ln Θ − 0.55) Van Ness-Abbot Method63 (1982) 1 1 ⎡n n ⎛ T 52 ⎞ 2 ⎛ T 52 ⎞ 2 ⎤ ⎢ ⎜ c ⎟ ⎜ c ⎟ ⎥ ⎢∑∑ x i x j ⎜ P ⎟ ⎜ P ⎟ ⎥ ⎝ c ⎠ i ⎝ c ⎠ j ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ i =1 j=1 2 Tpc = 2 3 ⎡n n ⎛ Tc ⎞ ⎛ Tc ⎞ ⎤ ⎢∑∑ x i x j ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎢⎣ i =1 j=1 ⎝ Pc ⎠ i ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥⎦ 4 3 (3.6875Θ −1 − 13.47).2905 − 0.56) 30 .

62) 2 8Tcij ⎡⎛ T ⎢⎜ c ⎢⎜⎝ Pc ⎣ 1 1 ⎞ 3 ⎛ Tc ⎞ 3 ⎤ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎠i ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥⎦ 3 (3.60) 2 cij T Pcij (3.57) Pedersen-Fredenslund-Christensen-Thomassen Method55.1 1 ⎡n n ⎛ T 52 ⎞ 2 ⎛ T 52 ⎞ 2 ⎤ ⎢ ⎜ c ⎟ ⎜ c ⎟ ⎥ ⎢∑∑ x i x j ⎜ P ⎟ ⎜ P ⎟ ⎥ ⎝ c ⎠ i ⎝ c ⎠ j ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ i =1 j=1 2 Ppc = 5 3 ⎡n n ⎤ ⎛ Tc ⎞ ⎛ Tc ⎞ ⎢∑∑ x i x j ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎢⎣ i =1 j=1 ⎝ Pc ⎠ i ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥⎦ 4 3 (3.56 (1984) ⎡⎛ T x i x j ⎢⎜⎜ c ∑∑ ⎢⎝ Pc i j ⎣ n Tpc = n ⎡⎛ T ⎢⎜ c x x ∑∑ i j ⎜ ⎢⎝ Pc i j ⎣ n n 1 1 ⎛T ⎞ ⎞ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ c ⎟⎟ ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎠i 1 3 1 ⎛T ⎞ ⎞ ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ c ⎟⎟ ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎠i 3 3 3 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 3 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 3 Tci Tcj (3.59) Teja-Thurner-Pasumarti Method (1985) n n Tcij Tpc = ∑∑ x i x j Pcij Ppc i =1 j=1 2 pc T Ppc n n = ∑∑ x i x j i =i j=1 (3.63) Sutton Method62 (1985) 31 .58) 3 ⎡⎛ T ⎞ 13 ⎛ T ⎞ 13 ⎤ 8∑∑ x i x j ⎢⎜⎜ c ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ c ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎢⎝ Pc ⎠ i i j ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥⎦ ⎣ Ppc = 3 2 ⎡n n ⎡⎛ T ⎞ 13 ⎛ T ⎞ 13 ⎤ ⎤ ⎢ x i x j ⎢⎜⎜ c ⎟⎟ + ⎜⎜ c ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎢∑∑ ⎢⎝ Pc ⎠ i i j ⎝ Pc ⎠ j ⎥⎦ ⎥ ⎢⎣ ⎣ ⎦ n n Tci Tcj (3.61) where Tcij = ξ ij (Tci Tcj ) Pcij = 1 (3.

68) 3 (3.66) a m B c2 Pc = 2 b m [3Z c2 + (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c ] (3.67) n n i j a m = ∑∑ x i x j (a i a j ) 0.65) (3.69) α m = ∑∑ x i x j (α i α j ) 0.72) 32 .70) β m = ∑∑ x i x j (β i β j ) 0.⎡ c ⎛ T ⎢∑ x i ⎜ c ⎜ 12 ⎢ i ⎝ Pc ⎣ Tpc = ⎛T 1 x i ⎜⎜ c ∑ 3 i ⎝ Pc c Ppc = ⎤ ⎞ ⎟ −E ⎥ k ⎟ ⎥ ⎠i ⎦ ⎞ 2 ⎡ nc ⎛ Tc ⎟⎟ + ⎢∑ x i ⎜⎜ ⎠ i 3 ⎢⎣ i ⎝ Pc ⎡ nc ⎛ T ⎢∑ x i ⎜ c ⎜ 12 ⎢ i ⎝ Pc ⎣ ⎡ nc ⎢ 1 x ⎛⎜ Tc i⎜ ⎢3 ∑ ⎝ Pc ⎢⎣ i 2 2 ⎞ 2⎤ ⎟ ⎥ − EJ ⎟ ⎥ ⎠i ⎦ 1 ⎤ ⎞ ⎟ −E ⎥ k ⎟ ⎥ ⎠i ⎦ ⎞ 2 ⎡ nc ⎛ Tc ⎟⎟ + ⎢∑ x i ⎜⎜ ⎠ i 3 ⎢⎣ i ⎝ Pc (3.5 β ij (3. (3.71) Θ 3 Z3c + Θ 2 Zc2 + Θ1Zc + Θ 0 = 0 where.5 α ij (3.64) 2 1 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠i 2 2 ⎤ ⎤ ⎥ − EJ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥⎦ ⎦ Lawal-Lake-Silberberg65 (2002) a m Bc Tc = 2 b m R[3Z c + (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c ] 2 (3.5 a ij ⎞ ⎛ n b m = ⎜ ∑ x i b1/3 i ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ i n n i j n n i j (3.

5S g2 (3.74) 3 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦⎥ 5 4 4 3 (3.7S g − 11.77) 33 .76) Tpc ( o R ) = 187 + 330S g − 71.3 Pseudocritical Gas Gravity Correlation Methods The Standing90 gas gravity correlation is stated as: Ppc (psia ) = 706 − 51. θ 3 = (α 3m + 6α 2m + 12α m + 8) θ 2 = −3(α 2m − 5α m + 9β m − 5) θ1 = 3(α m + 2) θ0 = −1 Redlich-Kwong-Abbott Tpc = Ppc = ⎡ n ⎛ 52 ⎢ x ⎜ Tc i Pc ⎜ ⎢∑ i ⎝ ⎣⎢ ⎞ 2⎤ ⎟ ⎥ ⎟ ⎥ ⎠ i ⎦⎥ 1 ⎡ n ⎛T ⎞ ⎤ ⎢∑ x i ⎜ c P ⎟ ⎥ c ⎠i ⎥ ⎝ ⎢⎣ i ⎦ ⎡ n ⎛ 52 ⎢ x ⎜ Tc i Pc ⎜ ⎢∑ i ⎝ ⎣⎢ 1 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠i 2 ⎡ n ⎛T ⎞ ⎤ ⎢∑ x i ⎜ c P ⎟ ⎥ c ⎠i ⎥ ⎝ ⎣⎢ i ⎦ 2 3 (3.73) where.3.1S g2 (3.Θ 3 = (α 3m + 6α 2m + 12α m + 8) Θ 2 = −3(1 + 4α 2m + 4α m + 3β m − 3α m β m ) Θ1 = 3(2α 2m + 2β m − 2α m β m + α m ) Θ 0 = (α m β m − β m − α 2m ) θ 3 B3c + θ 2 Bc2 + θ1Bc + θ 0 = 0 (3.75) 3 3.

9821 and that for Tpc is 0.7924S g2 (3.9999.976S g2 (3.85) This work: Ppc (psia ) = 659.8 − 131.18 + 358.87) The R2 for Ppc is 0.34S g − 7.5S g − 74.2 + 349. 34 .83) Brill-Beggs102 gas gravity correlation is stated as: Ppc (psia ) = 708.82S g + 0.79) Elsharkawy-Hashem-Alikhan90 gas gravity correlation is stated as: Ppc (psia ) = 787.82) Tpc ( o R ) = 170.84) Tpc ( o R ) = 169.14S g − 66.86) Tpc ( o R ) = 165.306S g − 63.78) Tpc ( o R ) = 169.344S g (3.916S g2 (3.80) Tpc ( o R ) = 149.94 + 57.06 − 147.0 + 314.718S g (3.604 + 58.0S g − 3.491 + 307.5S g (3.81) Hankinson-Thomas-Philips91 gas gravity correlation is stated as: Ppc (psia ) = 709.0S g (3.95 + 321.6S g2 (3.75 − 57.0S g2 (3.The Sutton90 gas gravity correlation is stated as: Ppc (psia ) = 756.012S g2 (3.

700 Pc Calculated (psia) 680 Stan Sutt ElHA HaTPh BrBe ThisWork 660 640 620 600 600 620 640 660 680 700 Pc Experimental (psia) Figure 3. Stan 530 Sutt ElHA HaTPh 490 BrBe o Tc Calculated ( R) ThisWork 450 410 370 330 330 370 410 450 490 530 o Tc Experimental ( R) Figure 3.1: Comparison of Six Correlations for Pseudocritical Pressure Parameters.2: Compare Six Correlations for Pseudocritical Temperature Parameters. 35 .

Authors Year System Sage-Lacey 1950 C1 Reference No.Table 3.Nichols 1955 nC7 9 Sage-Lacey 1950 H2S 8 Sage-Lacey 1950 N2 8 Sage-Lacey 1950 CO2 8 36 . 8 Sage-Lacey 1950 C2 8 Sage-Lacey 1950 C3 8 Sage-Lacey 1950 iC4. nC5 8 Stewart-Sage-Lacey 1954 nC6 10 Sage-Reamer.2: Sources of Experimental Z-Factor for Pure Substances. nC4 8 Sage-Lacey 1950 iC5.

88) ⎛ ∂ 2P ⎞ ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ = 0 ⎝ ∂V ⎠ T at T = Tc and P = Pc (3.91) 3. van der Waals Pseudocritical Theory3 (1873) ⎛ ∂P ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ =0 ⎝ ∂V ⎠ T at T = Tc and P = Pc (3. acentric factor or product of molecular weight and acentric factor.5 Improved Theory for Pseudocritical Mixture Parameter Mixture rules significantly affect the accuracy of mixture property determination.89) 2. This method is capable of predicting critical properties of mixtures irrespective of the component and its composition.90) ⎛ ∂ 2G ⎞ ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ = 0 ⎝ ∂x ⎠ T .4 van der Waals Theory of Pseudocritical Methods Criticality Theory 1. The BIN can be function of molecular weights. Numerous methods have been proposed but none of them present a generalized method for critical property prediction with high accuracy.3. Wilson Renormalization Theory (1982) 3. Care must be taken in 37 . In this project a method is presented which is based on LLS EOS. Gibbs Criteria (1928) ⎛ ∂G ⎞ ⎟ =0 ⎜ ⎝ ∂x ⎠ T .P (3. Weighted average based on mole fraction has been the general rule since Kay but this method is an approximate method and more rigorous methods are required for accurate determination of mixture properties. Prediction method of binary interaction number is an essential parameter in mixture critical property determination. Most of the methods are either statistical or empirical and therefore are bound by errors.P (3.3.3.

applying these rules of predicting BIN with gas mixtures containing very light and heavy components. 38 .1 Design Procedure for Scaling Parameter The scaling parameter for hydrocarbon components is developed based on wide range of available experimental data and measuring the deviation of SK computational methods from experimental data. A wide range of experimental z-factor data for natural gases containing significant amounts of acid gases.4 Designed Scaling Parameter for Standing-Katz Z-Factor Chart In order to extend the use of SK chart to the prediction of z-factors for sour and acid gases without resorting to the Wichert-Aziz2 correction formula for pseudocritical pressures and temperatures parameters. 3. non-hydrocarbon compounds. It should be noted that in BIN can be equal to 1 only in case of pure composition. The error is in the method of calculation of the pseudocritical pressures and temperatures. and C7+ fraction were collected and used in this project to develop the scaling parameter.4. Other occasions of concern could be when isomers are present in a gas mixture. it is used wrongly. In the design of a scaling parameter. This scaling parameter is developed by overlaying the experimental z-factor curves for the same range of pressures and temperatures as that of SK chart and measuring the deviation from of the SK chart curves. a universal scaling parameter has been established. 3. hydrogen sulfide. and sour reservoir gases resulted in a similar modification (or scaling) parameter requirement. and carbon dioxide were considered. A mathematical quantification of this deviation for hydrocarbon compounds. sour gas. This observation establishes the fact that the SK chart is designed perfectly but most of the time. non-hydrocarbon components that are commonly found in the reservoir gases like nitrogen.

a1 and a2 for each mixture is collected and is subjected to linear regression analysis.1 of Appendix C.The step-by-step procedure for obtaining the scaling factor is as follows: 1. 4.83084 − 0. 3. A regression analysis of the reduced pressure and ZSK scaled z-factor (based on step 1) is performed to obtain a quadratic expression for scaling factor at each temperature of the mixture.94) a2 = − 3.4852E − 03(ωM w ) (3. The equations describing the final expressions are presented below. More results on this can be seen in the Section C.95) The prediction results using the scaling factor technique is presented below.31 1. z Expt . The coefficients a0.41702(ωM w ) (3. 2.40E − 05 1.92) where a0 = 0. 39 .78. z SF = z SK × zc .2722E − 02 − 4.93) a1 = 9. SF = a 0 + a1PR + a 2 PR2 (3. The general expressions for these coefficients are obtained by performing regression analysis as functions of product of molecular weight and acentric factor (ωMw). 5.54E − 04 0.15675(ωM w ) (3. The equation describing it is Equation 3.04518 − 0.

72 0 2. 40 8.92 0.000 6.41 Expt.81 0.4: Scaled Z-Factor for Buxton and Campbell Data (Mix-5) at 130 oF.000 6.22 1.3: Scaled Z-Factor for Buxton & Campbell Data (Mix-5) at 160 oF.12 1.42 Expt.71 0 2.1.000 4. 1.91 0.000 .02 0.31 SK Scaled Z-Factor 1.000 4. SK 1. 1.01 0.21 1.32 Scaled Z-Factor 1.82 0.000 8.000 Pressure (psia) Figure 3.11 1.000 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3.

25 SK Scaled Z-Factor 1. 1.000 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3.6: Scaled Z-Factor for Satter Data (Mix-E) at 160 oF.000 4.9 0.15 1.35 Expt.65 0 2.2 Expt.1.75 0. 41 12 . 1.1 SK 1 0.000 6. Scaled Z-Factor 1.05 0.000 8.8 0 3 6 9 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3.85 0.95 0.5: Scaled Z-Factor for Buxton and Campbell Data (Mix-5) at 100 oF.

5 0.6 Tr=1.15 Tr=1.4 Tr=2.3 Tr=1.7: SK Z-Chart Developed Based on Computation SK Technique.25 Tr=1. 42 8 .9 Tr=1.5 Tr=1.8 Tr=1.2 Tr=1.05 Tr=1. Figure 3.0 0.0 Tr=1.9 Tr=1.3 TR = 1.0 Tr=1.5 is a zchart developed based on computation techniques developed based on a correlation developed for SK Z-Chart.5Designed pR/z Versus Z-Factor Chart This section provides a clear view of an ideal z-chart and the eventually the capability of predicting amount of gas produced by a graphical means.7 0.1 0 2 4 6 Reduced Pressure Figure 3.3.1 Z-Factor Values 0.4 Tr=1.0 Tr=2.6 Tr=2.7 Tr=2.8 Tr=3.1 Tr=1. 1.45 0.2 Tr=2.35 Tr=1.

4 0.25 0.15 Tr=1.9 Tr=2.0 Tr=2. 3.4 Exp Standing-Katzl 1.6 Tr=1.0 Tr=2. Mix-2 Result.9 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 PR/z Figure 3.40 Tr=1.000 6.6 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Natural Gases 1.80 Tr=1.6 Tr=2.40 Tr=1.0 0.000 Pressure (psia) Figure 3. 43 8.7 0 2.8 0.9: Scaled Z-Factor Buxton & Campbell. @ T = 130 oF.50 Tr=1.2 Tr=1.3 Scaledt Z-Factor 1.45 0.000 .30 Tr=1.8 Tr=3.7 Tr=1.1 1 0.2 Tr=2.20 TR=1.Tr=1.05 1.60 Tr=1.000 4.0 Tr=1.2 1.35 Z-Factor Tr=1.8: Amount of gas produced.8 0.00 Tr=1.1 Tr=1.

06 0. Mix-3 Result.000 4.000 4.86 0. @ T = 100 oF.000 Pressure (psia) Figure 3. @ T = 100 oF.8 0 2.000 6. Mix-2 Result.3 Exp Standing-Katz Scaled 1.1 1 0. 1.11: Scaled Z-Factor Buxton & Campbell. 44 8.76 0 2.000 6.000 Pressure (psia) Figure 3.9 0.10: Scaled Z-Factor Buxton & Campbell.16 Z-Factor 1.96 0.000 8.000 .1.2 Z-Factor 1.26 Exp Standing-Katzl Scaled 1.

45 .

6 154 0.0078 0.0258 0.0078 0.0803 0.6 1066.97 0.0162 0.0231 0.0096 0.5 120 0.19 0.0821 0.9224 0.0086 0.804 378.9835 T( F) P (psia) Z (Expt.0839 0. 39 Rich gas Condensate IND H2S 281 0 282 0 283 0 284 0 285 0 286 0 287 0 CO2 0.05 0.927 9.0159 0.0082 0.0069 0.0073 0.0982 1.0084 0.77 447.5793 313 3000 0.0089 0.0082 0.6583 0.0252 0.0184 0.3: Rich Gas Condensate Composition (Elsharkawy71).0242 0.0905 0.0208 iC5 0.0 113 0.0248 0.023 0.0092 C7+ 0.0086 0.011 0.ft.0282 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.9531 0.TR ⎣ Z ⎦ PR .9 Tc C7+.0073 0.1 1081.0161 0.17 0.0411 0.8964 0.2 115 0.0155 0.0108 0.0725 313 2000 0.0062 0.0447 0.4 139 0.0817 0.) ZSK ZScaled(This Study) 46 .3 128 0.0213 313 5100 1.7583 0.0784 0.0266 N2 0. (oR) 1264.) ρ(lb/cu.0323 0.68 0.7074 0.97 2.0931 313 4100 0.738 0.6 1060. Table 3.0495 iC4 0.7 1136.007 0. Serial No.0417 0.0116 0.9806 1.0155 0.96).TR (3.5 o 313 6010 1.0863 0.789 404.0062 0.0167 0.0166 0.7485 0.3 1.008 nC5 0.3.4 1105.93 6.778 427.0186 0.7 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Reservoir Gases Scaling is done based on the law of corresponding states principle as follows: ⎡ Z Scaled ⎤ ⎡ Z SK ⎤ = ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ SF ⎥ ⎣ Z c ⎦ PR .212 26.9311 0.7559 0.0143 C1 0.7292 C2 0.0262 0.0097 0.017 0.967 14.0253 0.0402 0.0103 0.006 0.0075 0.1268 0.0163 0.79 0.054 18.0 1177.763 466.0415 0.0404 0.0944 C3 0.0091 nC4 0.007 0.0107 nC6 0.765 461.9054 0. (psia) 191 0.952 3.0137 0.831 324.0067 0.27 0.8660 313 700 0.4924 313 1200 0.

0669 0.9347 250 2400 0.2 116 0.809 11.0077 C7+ 0.27 443 0.Table 3.0049 0.762 492.4382 0.0051 0.7981 250 3600 0.0071 nC6 0.0699 0.0991 0.9734 0.0685 0.4 121 0.0679 N2 0.006 0.7 Tc C7+.9744 0. oR 1209.7 1090.272 442 0.9615 0.0496 0.0121 0.ft.0476 0.842 7.0694 0.0644 0.806 19.0106 0.9742 1.4: Highly Sour Gas Composition (Elsharkawy71).318 CO2 0.0055 0.3 0.0049 0.95 0.1 112 0.0020 T( F) P (psia) Z (Expt.91 0.282 440 0.0096 0.0471 0.838 27.9755 0.0052 0.7 1062.52 0.0081 0.) ρ(lb/cu.0063 0.0608 0.7 1075.0078 0.06 0.4688 0.9853 250 700 0.0461 0.006 0.9709 250 1200 0.0074 nC5 0.) ZSK ZScaled(This Study) 47 .0239 0.0192 0.818 365.7 107 0.0055 0.0068 0.764 486.014 iC5 0. psia 165 0.888 5.273 444 0.0252 0.06 0.0111 0.0248 0.006 0.9564 250 1800 0.8974 250 3000 0.7 1052.0481 0.3 o 250 4190 0.4641 0.0217 0.0054 0.0493 0.0053 0.4807 0.0434 0.8295 0.0069 0.0114 0.4033 0.0058 0.5 1046. Serial No.935 2.0067 nC4 0.0383 0.9299 0.0243 0.3 1046.0055 0.8 109 0. 57 Highly sour gas condensate IND H2S 439 0.0448 0.0487 0.0066 0.762 492.0079 0.012 0.4844 0.778 453.799 15.0394 C1 0.0057 0.289 445 0.063 0.0473 0.0286 0.0 107 0.773 467.0237 0.0494 C3 0.0412 0.0277 iC4 0.4331 C2 0.0239 0.006 0.768 477.0132 0.277 441 0.0455 0.0214 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.0106 0.34 0.

7935 0.0036 0.6352 0.0551 0.6 1071.1937 0.0031 0. psia 170 0.0032 0.0036 0.763 446.0411 0. Carbon Dioxide Rich Gas Serial No.0032 0.7151 0.0049 0.0039 nC5 0.0033 0.0388 C1 0.0174 0.7661 0.03 0.003 930 0.0046 0.0035 0.3 110 0.ft.0034 C7+ 0.6514 0.7233 0.2037 0.0318 C3 0.0051 0.0038 0.72 25.773 421.811 347.0417 0.851 34.5: Carbon Dioxide Rich Gas Composition (Elsharkawy71).0088 0.8653 0.6706 0.0082 0.783 397.0399 0.6716 N2 0.0324 0.003 927 0.0175 0.915 4.88 0.0421 0.0039 0.777 30.4 1131.2 1046.003 0.8247 0.0313 0.6579 0.0036 0.0031 0.) ZSK ZScaled(This Study) 0.003 928 0.797 373.851 7.Table 3.0046 nC6 0.004 CO2 0.0127 0.9084 0.0047 0.0038 0.003 929 0.017 0.0042 0.003 0.0033 0.8151 0.0 1100.0386 0.58 0.0315 0.0184 iC4 0.0303 0.775 12.041 0.0202 0.003 0.0035 nC4 0.003 932 0.003 0.0113 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.) ρ(lb/cu.0101 0.0458 0.0169 0.9 139 0.38 0.0085 0.8685 0.6395 0.0042 0.4 Tc C7+. oR 1211.003 931 0.7028 0.0097 iC5 0.7 118 0.0033 0.9 0.8 153 0.1994 C2 0.0093 0.4 106 0.1988 0.9125 48 .0082 0.0309 0.9 1034. 124 IND H2S 926 0.0308 0.207 0.39 0.017 0.7739 0.6639 0.9434 0.5 o T( F) P (psia) 219 4825 219 4100 219 3300 219 2600 219 1900 219 1200 219 700 Z (Expt.8 128 0.2008 0.6 1169.755 469.0172 0.2084 0.719 19.751 482.0307 0.87 0.7884 0.0088 0.

942 0.0726 0.6: Very Light Gas Composition (Elsharkawy71).0089 0.7 126 0.6 116 0.933 6.0082 0.0063 0.769 423.2 114 0.0023 0.0012 0.0023 0.0013 0.9310 209 2600 0.4 1064.5 114 0.0082 0.1 1093.0082 0.0012 0.9955 0.9883 0.0232 0.787 390.9170 209 1300 0.0038 N2 0.3 1058.0077 0.0023 0.0012 0.0008 0.0013 C7+ 0.0008 0.0008 0.0 1075.947 3.933 5.5 133 0.0026 iC5 0.969 1.1235 1.9438 0.0236 C3 0.023 0.0013 0.0034 0.9264 209 700 0.42 1.) ρ(lb/cu.0082 0.9468 0.0025 0.019 12.0233 0.0025 0.0025 0.0231 0.0012 0.006 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.023 0.0008 0. Very light gas 125 Serial No.9 120 0.0082 0.0375 0.0231 0.0008 0.0119 0.0009 nC6 0.76 1.0033 0.03 0.0033 0.9565 209 3300 0. oR 1142.0023 0.0103 0.0025 0.0033 0.0008 0.0083 iC4 0.76 450.763 438.0023 nC4 0.0033 0.0033 C1 0.2 Tc C7+.) ZSK ZScaled(This Work) 49 .0007 209 4000 0.0069 0.9467 C2 0. psia 143 0.0025 0.13 1.3 o 209 4786 1.92 1.974 10.0035 0.9451 0.78 0.ft.758 456.9473 0.0013 0.0033 0.945 8.9461 0.0013 0.0012 0.777 409.0025 0.9458 T( F) P (psia) Z (Expt.0012 nC5 0.0023 0.9884 0.758 456.0032 0.0082 0.0023 0.9179 209 1900 0.0033 0.0012 0.0012 0.0036 0. IND H2S 933 0 934 0 935 0 936 0 937 0 938 0 939 0 CO2 0.012 0.0035 0.37 0.0014 0.1 1114.0033 0.Table 3.3 1058.

3167 0.775 0.777 0.2062 844.4605 636.8669 499.212 1.851 0.9245 285.5596 543.3853 743.2834 811.4191 473.6602 2.7: Property Prediction for Gas Composition Data (Elsharkawy71).346 2.6418 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 669 669 669 669 669 669 669 4786 4000 3300 2600 1900 1300 700 2.3326 636.1209 4.6069 543.3079 324.4864 408. oR Pc.603 284.2930 0.0142 805.2930 1.3187 479.945 0.4711 439 710 4190 1.3095 1.3016 0.1664 270.6632 1.4974 288.1324 541.8504 0. T.1873 2.3016 0.809 0.952 0.5952 330.806 0.3079 0.947 0.0284 5.0735 441.0509 803.3014 0.2594 284.2932 0.1668 285.2512 413.3093 0.459 4.5574 4.019 0.8195 2.842 0.2931 0.6642 473.3111 0.719 0.3011 0.5822 Very Light Gas 8.8854 1.2353 .9693 7.0157 469.5364 344.288 50 283.5019 2.317 0.5066 0.6467 512.3006 0.935 868.3661 1.3522 285.933 0.7844 329.967 0.5324 1.3162 0.3607 1.054 0.3535 2.3163 0.851 0.2057 2.7923 9.2930 0.4904 5.8043 3.3013 0.8831 1.1407 270.4649 662.7129 3.97 476.3506 2.4760 0.psia TR PR Tc.8496 2.3176 0.5443 274.2224 2.3460 2.6188 329.5429 6. Data No.3235 4.6412 807.799 0.3137 0.545 9.6376 440 441 442 443 444 445 710 710 710 710 710 710 3600 3000 2400 1800 1200 700 1.4470 624.3077 0.4526 6.9986 3.2255 0.6622 1.0239 825.2935 0. psia Zc ZExpt Rich Gas Condensate 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 773 773 773 773 773 773 773 6010 5100 4100 3000 2000 1200 700 1.8906 2.4475 1.3161 0.927 0.8577 3.8615 2.7226 539.915 533.9311 474.969 Highly Sour Gas CO2 Rich Gas 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 679 679 679 679 679 679 679 4825 4100 3300 2600 1900 1200 700 1.5490 623.679 2.0302 659.974 0.9140 276.1462 2.8983 284.5372 1.156 2.2933 0.8097 350.4895 0.3161 0.766 408.5994 536.0593 2.3565 2.3914 1.3445 2.3012 0.6176 1.Table 3.888 0.933 0.838 375.7072 419.3480 2.8299 629.3083 0.1855 542.93 0.8533 2.4678 0.8606 475.72 0.9547 8.3454 5.oR P.0567 465.

13: Scaled Z-Factor for Carbon Dioxide Rich Gas Composition. 51 6 .15 Expt.8 0.05 1 0. 1 Expt.12: Scaled Z-Factor for Very Light Gas Composition. SK Scaled Z-Factor 0.1.7 0 2 4 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3.9 0 2 4 6 8 10 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3. SK Scaled 1.1 Z-Factor 1.95 0.9 0.

2 Z-Factor 1 0.15: Scaled Z-Factor for Highly Sour Gas Composition.05 1 Z-Factor 0.85 Expt.95 0.4 1.1. SK Scaled 0.6 0.2 Scaled 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3.8 0 2 4 Pressure (Psia) Figure 3.14: Scaled Z-Factor for Rich Gas Condensate Composition.8 0. 1.9 0. 52 6 .4 Expt. SK 0.

(V − b ) modifying only the denominator in the attractive term. The critical properties. accuracy was the priority but a universal equationof-state method was required as most of the EOSs worked best in a certain range of pressures and temperatures and compositions. to name only a few. Most of these equations retain the original van der Waals repulsive term RT . PR EOS reported that their EOS predicts better liquid densities than the SRK EOS but not accurate enough for all ranges of pressures and temperatures including other phases. molecular weight. Since the introduction of the van der Waals4 EOS. A major drawback of the SRK EOS was the poor liquid density prediction.1 Selection of Cubic Equations-of-State Some phase behavior applications require the use of an equation of state to predict properties of petroleum reservoir fluids. acentric factor. and binary-interaction parameters (BIP’s) of components in mixture are required for EOS calculations. With the existing chemical-separation techniques. Another problem with the 53 . many cubic EOS’s have been proposed like the Redlich and Kwong13 EOS (RK EOS) in 1949. we usually cannot identify the many hundreds and thousands of components found in reservoir fluids.CHAPTER 4 Z-FACTOR PREDICTION FROM CUBIC EQUATIONS OF STATE 4. With the advent of simulation techniques in petroleum engineering. the Peng and Robinson12 EOS (PR EOS) in 1976. Most petroleum engineering relied on the PR EOS or a modification of the RK EOS. Soave’s19 modification (SRK EOS) was the simplest and most widely used. Many other proposed equations of states relied on complex temperature functions to represent the highly nonlinear correction terms for EOS constants.

2 Lawal-Lake-Silberberg Equation of State P= RT a (T ) − 2 V − b V + αbV − βb 2 (4. 4. It is observed that the prediction of z-factor is significantly dependent on the accuracy of the critical properties supplied/predicted.2) β= Zc2 (Ω w − 1)3 + 2Ω 2w Zc + (1 − 3Zc )Ω w Ω 2w Zc (4.6) 54 .1) where α= 1 + Ω w Zc − 3Zc Ω w Zc (4.3) Ω a = (1 + (Ω w − 1) Zc ) 3 (4. Each of these equations of state has been thoroughly examined in their ability to be able to predict zfactor both for pure substances and gas mixtures (including natural gases and sour natural gases with significant amounts of C7+). LLS EOS method can be adopted as a universal method for z-factor determination.5) b= Ω b RTc Pc (4.4) R 2Tc2 a = Ωa Pc (4. Based on this observation. LLS29 EOS was observed to be capable of predicting accurate critical properties for gas mixtures and therefore. Eight equations of state have been chosen which are commonly used in the reservoir simulation and calculation purposes in the petroleum industry.existing EOS and other methods of predicting EOS parameters is that they cannot predict properties of components heavier than approximately C20. more accurate z-factor prediction is possible with this method for a wide range of pressures and temperatures and for any gas composition. Hence.

14) 1 i j 1 i 0. R 2T 2 B= bP RT . Mixing Rules: 1 1 a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij i 1 ⎤ ⎡ b m = ⎢∑ x i bi 3 ⎥ ⎣ i ⎦ a ij = a ij = (4.7) where. Φ 3 = 1.12) β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) (4.8) j ωi ωj ωj ωi 3 (4.5 1 1 0.11) α m = ∑∑ x i x jα i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) (4.5 j 55 .10) for ωi > ω j (4.9) for ωi ≤ ω j (4. A= a (T ) P .13) a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (4.Z-Form of the EOS: Φ 3 Z 3 + Φ 2 Z 2 + Φ1 Z + Φ 0 = 0 (4.0 Φ 2 = −[1 + (1 − α)B] [ Φ1 = A − αB − (β + α)B2 ] Φ 0 = − ⎡AB − β(B2 + B3 ) ⎤ where.

temperature. First.375 . The van der Waals EOS gives a simple.Tc . b. It can be mathematically expressed as: p= RT a − 2 V−b V (4.15) where a = attraction parameter b = repulsion parameter as compared to the ideal gas law. van der Waals also stated that the critical criteria that are used to define the two EOS constants a and b which are the first and second derivatives of pressure with respect to volume equal to zero at the critical point of a pure component.Tc . 8 56 . and molar volume. van der Waals EOS provides two important improvements. qualitatively accurate relation between pressure.18) 3 = 0.Vc (4. a/V2 term in the vdW EOS represents the non-ideal gas behavior and is interpreted as the attractive component of pressure. lim V(p) = b (4.Vc ⎝ ∂V ⎞ ⎟⎟ =0 ⎠ pc . The constants a and b are given by: 27 R 2 Tc2 a= 64 p c and b = 1 RTc 8 pc The critical compressibility results in z c = (4.16) p→∞ where be is referred to as the covolume. ⎛ ∂ 2p ⎛ ∂p ⎞ ⎜⎜ 2 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ∂V ⎠ pc . at high pressures. the prediction of liquid behavior is more accurate because volume approaches a limiting value.17) Martin and Hou show that this constraint is equivalent to the condition (z − z c ) = 0 at 3 the critical point.4.3 van der Waal Equation of State van der Waals4 proposed the first cubic EOS in 1873.

26Vc (4.19.22) where T is the system temperature in oR. p → ∞.24) b = Ωb RTc pc (4.5 a (TR ) pc (4. the molar volume V of the substance shrinks to about 26% of its critical volume regardless of the system temperature. The Equation 2. 4. which could considerably improve the prediction of the volumetric and physical properties of the vapor phase.17) on Equation 4.e. gives a = Ωa R 2 Tc2. This attractive pressure term has a temperature dependence term and their equation can be represented as: p= RT a (T ) − V − b V ( V + b) (4.20) 2 (RT ) 64 TR2 p 1 pR (4.. The authors in their development of the equation.4 Redlich-Kwong Equation of State Redlich and Kwong13 (1948) developed an adjustment in the van der Waals’ attractive pressure term (a/V2).25) where 57 . noted that as the system pressure becomes very large.19) p 27 p R where A = a = (4.van der Waals EOS in terms of z can be written as: z 3 − (B + 1)z 2 + Az − AB = 0 (4. i.21) B=b = RT 8 TR vdW EOS has a fixed zc (=0.23) Applying the critical point conditions (as expressed by Equation 4.17 was accordingly constructed to satisfy the following condition: b = 0. and solving the resulting equations simultaneously.375) for all components which is not true and no temperature function which is a drawback of vdW EOS.

22).21 gives p c Vc = 0.08664 Equating Equation 4.18 with Equation 4.31) 58 . Replacing the molar volume V in Equation 4. Redlich and Kwong extended the application of their equation to hydrocarbon liquid or gas mixtures by employing the following mixing rules: ⎤ ⎡n a m = ⎢∑ x i a i0. 4.5) in Equation 4.333 for all substances.26) The above expression shows that Redlich-Kwong EOS produces a universal critical compressibility factor (Zc) of 0.42748 Ω b = 0.30) The Redlich-Kwong value of zc=1/3 is reasonable for lighter hydrocarbons but is unsatisfactory for heavier components.27) bp RT (4.22 with a more general temperature-dependent term as demonstrated by (aα).5 ⎥ ⎦ ⎣ i =1 2 (4. to give p= RT aα(T) − V − b V ( V + b) (4.5 Soave-Redlich-Kwong Equation of State A significant development of cubic equations of state was the publication by Soave19 (1972) of a modification in the evaluation of the parameter a in the attractive pressure term of the Redlich-Kwong equation of state (Equation 4.29) ⎡n ⎤ b m = ⎢∑ x i b i ⎥ ⎣ i =1 ⎦ (4. Soave replaced the term (a/T0.28).333RTc (4.Ω a = 0.20 with ZRT/p gives A=a B= p R T2 2 (4.

35) where Ωa and Ωb are the Soave-Redlich-Kwong (SRK) dimensionless pure component parameters and have the following values: Ωa = 0.480 + 1. the following mixing rules were proposed by Soave: (a α )m = ∑ ∑ [x i x j (a i a j α i α j ) 0 .39) bp RT (4.38 with mixtures.38) where A= B= (aα )p (RT) 2 (4.34) RTc pc (4.31 are found by imposing the classical van der Waals’ critical point constraints (Equation 4.33) where ω is the acentric factor of the substance. to give R 2 Tc2 a = Ωa pc b = Ωb (4.32) The parameter m is correlated with the acentric factor.08664 (4. For any pure component.40) To use the Equation 4.176ω 2 (4.where α is a dimensionless factor which becomes unity at T = Tc. the constants a and b in Equation 4. the parameter α is defined by the following expression: α = (1 + m(1 − Tr0. to give m = 0. At temperatures other than critical temperature.42747 (4.36) Ωa = 0.31 and solving the resulting equations.574ω − 0.41) j 59 .37) The Z-Form of the Equation 4.5 i (k ij ] − 1) (4.17).5 )) 2 (4.31 is: Z 3 − Z 2 + (A − B − B 2 ) Z − AB = 0 (4. on Equation 4.

for the above expression: 60 2 .9776k ij∞ • For CO2 systems: ( ) k ij = 0.6958k ij∞ + 10853 k ij∞ where.55171ω − 0.15613ω2 (4.77215k ij∞ − 1.017921k ij∞ • For Methane systems with compounds of 10 or more: ( ) k ij = 0.32 to improve the pure component vapor pressure predictions by the SRK EOS.8407 k ij∞ • 2 For H2S systems: k ij = 0.44) The parameter kij is an empirically determined correction factor called the binary interaction coefficient.b m = ∑ [x i b i ] (4. The proposed relationship has the following form: m = 0.45) Elliot and Daubert38 (1985) stated that the evaluation of optimal interaction coefficients of asymmetric mixtures (components with significant difference in chemical behavior).43) (RT ) 2 bmp RT (4. proposed the following set of expressions for calculating kij. • For N2 systems: k ij = 0.08058 − 0.48508 + 1. Modifications of the SRK EOS Groboski and Daubert37 (1978) proposed a new expression for calculating the parameter m of Equation 4.107089 + 2.17985 + 2. characterizing the binary formed by component i and component j in the hydrocarbon mixture.07654 + 0.42) i with A= B= (aα )m p (4.

The major drawback in the SRK EOS is that the critical compressibility factor takes on the unrealistic universal critical compressibility of 0.5 / b i (4.6 Peng-Robinson Equation of State Peng and Robinson12 (1975) conducted a comprehensive study to evaluate the use of SRK equation of state for predicting the behavior of naturally occurring hydrocarbon systems.17) on Equation 4.48 can be rewritten as: RT aα(T) p= − V − b V ( V + b ) + b( V − b) (4.51) where Ω a = 0.46) and ε i = (a i log e (2)) 0. Consequently. The authors showed emphasis on the ability of the equation to predict liquid densities and other fluid properties particularly in the vicinity of the critical region.48 and solving for the parameters a and b.. the molar volumes are typically overestimated. They proposed the following expression: p= RT aα(T) − V − b (V + b) 2 − cb 2 (4.333 for all substances.45724 Ω b = 0. i.e. densities are underestimated. 4.k ij∞ = −(ε i − ε j ) 2 /(2ε i ε j ) (4.47).49) Imposing the classical critical point conditions (Equation 4. 48) Equation 4. 61 . yields R 2 Tc2 a = Ωa pc b = Ωb (4.07780 .50) RTc pc (4.

This equation predicts a universal critical gas compressibility factor of 0.307 compared to
0.333 for the SRK model. Peng and Robinson also adopted Soave’s approach for
calculating the parameter α:
α = (1 + m(1 − TR0.5 )) 2

(4.52)

where m = 0.3746 + 1.5423ω − 0.2699ω 2

(4.53)

This was later expanded by the investigators (1978) to give the following
relationship:

m = 0.379642 + 1.48503ω − 0.1644ω2 + 0.016667ω3

(4.54)

Rearranging Equation 2.37 into the compressibility factor form gives
Z 3 + (B − 1) Z 2 + (A − 3B 2 − 2B) Z − (AB − B 2 − B 3 ) = 0

(4.55)

The mixing rules for PR EOS are defined as follows:
a m = ∑∑ x i x j a 1i / 2 a 1j / 2 a ij

(4.56)

b m = ∑ x i bi

(4.57)

i

Although PR EOS is another widely used cubic EOSs in petroleum engineering
calculations, it underpredicts saturation pressure of reservoir fluids compared with SRK
EOS.

4.7 Schmidt-Wenzel Equation of State
Schmidt and Wenzel24 (1980) proposed an attractive pressure term that introduces
the acentric factor ω as a third parameter. The SW EOS has the following form:
p=

RT
a (T )
− 3
V − b V + (1 + 3ω)bV − 3ωb 2

(4. 58)

with
⎛ R 2 Tc2 ⎞
⎟⎟α
a = Ω a ⎜⎜
⎝ pc ⎠

(4.59)

62

⎛ RT
b = Ω b ⎜⎜ c
⎝ pc


⎟⎟

(4.60)

where
Ω a = (1 − ζ c (1 − β c )) 3

(4.61)

Ω b = βcξc

(4.62)

The βc is given by the smallest positive root of the following equation:

(6ω + 1)β3c + 3β c2 + 3β c − 1 = 0

(4. 63)

and
ξc =

1
3(1 + β c ω)

(4.64)

4.8 Patel-Teja Equation of State
Patel and Teja20 (1982) proposed the following three-parameter cubic equation:
p=

RT
a (T )

V − b V2 + (b + c)V − bc

(4.65)

In this equation “a” is a function of temperature, and b and c are constants
characteristic of each component. Equation 4.65 was constrained to satisfy the following
conditions:
∂p
=0
∂VTC

(4.66)

∂ 2p
=0
∂VT2C

(4.67)

p c Vc
= ξc
RTc

(4.68)

Patel and Teja pointed out that the third parameter c in the equation allows the
empirical parameter ξc to be chosen freely. Application of Equation 4.66 to Equation 4.67
yields:

63

R 2 Tc2
a = Ωa
[1 + m(1 − TR0.5 )]2
pc

(4.69)

b = Ωb

RTc
pc

(4.70)

c = Ωc

RTc
pc

(4.71)

Ω c = 1 − 3ξ c

(4.72)

Ωa = 3ξc2 + 3(1 − 2ξc )Ω b + Ω 2b + (1 − 3ξc )

(4.73)

where

and Ωb is the smallest positive root of the following equation:
Ω 3b + (2 − 3ξ c )Ω 2b + 3ξ c2 Ω b − ξ 3c = 0

(4.74)

Equation 4.74 can be solved for Ωb by using the Newton-Raphson iterative
method with an initial value for Ωb as given by
Ω b = 0.32429Z c − 0.002005

(4.75)

For non-polar fluids, the parameters m and, ξc are related to the acentric factor by
the following relationships:
m = 0.452413 + 1.30982ω − 0.295937ω 2

(4.76)

ξ c = 0.329032 − 0.0767992ω + 0.0211947ω 2

(4.77)

In terms of Z, Equation 4.65 can be rearranged to produce
Z3 + (C − 1)Z2 + (A − 2BC − B − C − B2 )Z + (BC + B2C − AB) = 0

(4.78)

where, for mixtures
A=

a mp
(RT )2

(4.79)

B=

bm p
RT

(4.80)

C=

cm p
RT

(4.81)

with

64

[

a m = ∑∑ x i x j (a i a j ) 0.5 (1 − k ij )

]

(4.82)

b m = ∑ [x i bi ]

(4.83)

cm = ∑ [x i ci ]

(4.84)

i

i

An improved relationship for undefined components such as C7+, the parameters
m and ξc was proposed by Willman and Teja40 (1986) in terms of the boiling point Tb and
specific gravity γ. Therefore, a major drawback of PT EOS is that additional information
is required to be able to determine volumetric properties of composition involving C7+.

4.9 Trebble-Bishnoi-Salim Equation of State
Trebble and Bishnoi26 proposed a four parameter equation of state and it can be
represented as follows:
p=

RT
a (T )
− 2
V − b V + (b + c)V − bc − d 2

(4.85)

Parameters “a” and “b” are temperature dependent while “c” and “d” are
independent of temperature. Therefore, new temperature functions for “a(T)” and “b(T)”
have been proposed. The value of “d” was determined for all the components available in
the database along the critical isotherm. “d” values for the remaining components were
calculated from a linear fit of optimized “d” values versus the critical volume. The value
of “c” was directly determined from the experimental value of the critical
compressibility. Once the parameters “c” and “d” are set, optimal values of “a” and “b”
are then calculated.
This TB EOS offers increased correlational flexibility and allows for significant
improvements in PVT predictions. Trebble and Bishnoi do mention that the quality of an
equation-of-state largely depends on the data used in its preparation

65

4.10 Transformed Cubic Equations to the LLS EOS Form
Lawal-Lake-Silberberg EOS is represented as:
P=

RT
a (T )
− 2
V − b V + αbV − β b 2

(4.1)

It is the most general form of the EOSs described in this study. This can be
observed by substituting the values of α and β with numerical constants as described in
the Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Common Specialization Cubic Equation of State

4.11 Generalized Reduced State of Cubic Equations-of-State
Described below is the derivation of reducing the general LLS EOS to the Zform:

66

P=

RT
a (T )
− 2
V − b V + αbV − β b 2

Multiply on both sides of Equation 4.1 by

(4.1)
V
, we get
RT

V
a (T )
V
RT V
RT
P
=

RT V − b RT V 2 + αbV − βb 2

(4.86)

Real Gas Equation: PV = ZRT

(4.87)

Using the real gas law, Equation 4.86 becomes,
a (T ) V
V
RT
Z=

V − b V 2 + αbV − β b 2

(4.88)

Simplifying Equation 4.88 using the real gas law: V =

ZRT
,
P

a (T) ZRT
Z=

1
b
1−
ZRT


P

(ZRT )2
P2

P
RT
αbZRT
+
− βP 2
P

(4.89)

Further simplifying Equation 4.89,
a (T) ZRT

P P2
1
RT
Z=

2
bp
(
ZRT
)
ZbPRT − β(bP) 2
+
α
1−
RTZ
A=
Defining
and

B=

(4.90)

a (T ) P

(RT )2

(4.91)

bP
RT

(4.92)

Using these definitions in Equation 4.90 and dividing the 2nd part of RHS by
get,

67

1
,we
(RT )2

98) The reduced form of the real-gas law can be expressed as Z = Z c f ( PR .96 by cross-multiplication.95. TR ) (4.99 to predict Z-factors of pure substances.99) In order to use Equation 4. νR.1 requires composition-dependent critical compressibility factor as well as mixture critical pressure.93) Simplifying Equation 4.96) Simplifying Equation 4. temperature and volume for the reduced parameters (PR. the computation of Z-factor from the reduced form of Equation 4.94.93.a (T ) P Z= 1 B 1− Z − (RT )2 ( ZRT) 2 (RT )2 + Z αZbPRT (RT )2 − β(bP) 2 (RT )2 (4. The task is accomplished in the next paragraph 68 .97) = Z 3 + (− 1 − B + αB)Z 2 + (A − αB − βB 2 − αB 2 )Z + (β B 3 + β B 2 − AB) = 0 (4. we get Z 3 + (− B + αB)Z 2 + (− β B 2 − αB 2 )Z + β B 3 = Z 2 + αBZ − β B 2 − AZ + AB (4. natural and sour gases by utilizing cubic equations of state. TR).95) Canceling Z on the numerators on both sides in Equation 4. we get Z= Z AZ − 2 Z − B Z + αBZ − β B 2 (4. we get 1= 1 A − 2 Z − B Z + αBZ − β B 2 (4.94) Using the definitions of A and B and further simplifying Equation 4. a (T ) P Z= 1 B 1− Z (RT )2 − Z2 + Z αZbP β(bP) 2 − (RT ) (RT )2 (4.

69 . Bc and Zc are defined by Equations 4.1 by dividing the expression of Equation 4.101 by replacing pure substance parameters with mixture parameters: θ3 = 1 ⎛ 1 BP ⎞ θ 2 = − ⎜⎜ + (1 − α m ) c R ⎟⎟ Z c TR ⎠ ⎝ Zc 2 ⎞ ⎛ A P ⎧ ⎫ B P B P c R c R c R ⎟ θ1 = ⎜ 2 2+ θm − α m 2 − (α m + β m )⎨ ⎬ ⎜ Z c TR Z T Z c TR ⎩ c R ⎭ ⎟⎠ ⎝ ⎛ A B P2 ⎡ 1 ⎧ B P ⎫ 2 ⎧ B P ⎫3 ⎤ ⎞ ⎜ c c R θ 0 = − 3 3+ θ m − β m ⎢ ⎨ c R ⎬ + ⎨ c R ⎬ ⎥ ⎟ ⎜Z T ⎢⎣ Z c ⎩ Z c TR ⎭ ⎩ Z c TR ⎭ ⎥⎦ ⎟⎠ ⎝ c R (4.The reduced compressibility factor (ZR) equation for pure substances can be derived from Equation 4.105.103-4.102) In Equations 4.102.101) where θ3 = 1 ⎛ 1 Ω P ⎞ θ 2 = − ⎜⎜ + (1 − α) b R ⎟⎟ Z c TR ⎠ ⎝ Zc 2 ⎞ ⎛ Ω P ⎧ ⎫ P P Ω Ω a R b R b R ⎟ θ1 = ⎜ 2 2+ θc − α 2 − ( α + β) ⎨ ⎬ ⎜ Z c TR Z T Z c TR ⎩ c R ⎭ ⎟⎠ ⎝ ⎛ Ω Ω P2 ⎡ 1 ⎧ Ω P ⎫ 2 ⎧ Ω P ⎫3 ⎤ ⎞ ⎜ a b R θ 0 = − 3 3+ θ c − β ⎢ ⎨ b R ⎬ + ⎨ b R ⎬ ⎥ ⎟ ⎜ ZT ⎢⎣ Z c ⎩ Z c TR ⎭ ⎩ Z c TR ⎭ ⎥⎦ ⎟⎠ ⎝ c R The reduced compressibility factor (ZR) equation for mixtures can be derived from Equation 4.100) θ 3 Z 3R + θ 2 Z 2R + θ1 Z R + θ 0 = 0 (4. the composition-dependent parameters Ac.100 by Zc: α= 1 + Ω w Zc − 3Zc Ω w Zc (4.

107) 4.105) where φ 3 = 8 + 12α m + 6α 2m + α 3m φ 2 = 15 + 15α m − 27β m − 3α 2m φ1 = 6 + 3α m φ 0 = −1 The expressions for mixture critical pressure and temperature are thereby established in Equations 4.106) Bc am 2 b m R[3Z c + (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c ] (4.103) θ 3 Z 3c + θ 2 Z c2 + θ1 Z c + θ 0 = 0 (4.A c = (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c + 3Z c2 (4. 70 .99 and 4.104) where θ 3 = 8 + 12α m + 6α 2m + α 3m θ 2 = − (3 + 12α m + 12α 2m + 9β m − 9α m β m ) θ1 = 3α m + 6α 2m + 6β m − 6α m β m θ 0 = − (α 2m + β m − α m β m ) φ 3 B 3c + φ 2 B c2 + φ1 B c + φ 0 = 0 (4. More results on this can been seen in Appendix D.102 B c2 am Pc = 2 b m [3Z c2 + (α m + β m )B c2 + α m B c ] Tc = (4.12 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Pure Substances A graphical comparative result of the eight EOSs is shown with the experimental values for the components as shown below.

35 1. T=560 0. Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt.93 Z-Factor 0.53 LLS 920 R Expt. T=680 0.63 LLS 680 R 0.83 0. vs. 71 9000 .33 0.2: Z-Factor comparison for LLS-EOS for Carbon dioxide.85 Expt. LLS-EOS) 1.95 LLS 920 R Expt.73 LLS 560 R 0.03 0.75 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure. T=560 Expt.15 1. T=680 Expt.05 LLS 560 R LLS 680 R 0. T=920 0.25 Z-Factor 1. vs.13 1.23 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure. T=920 0. P (Psia) Figure 4.1: Z-Factor comparison for LLS-EOS for Methane.Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt. P (Psia) Figure 4.43 Expt. LLS) 1.

Vs.7 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure (psia) Figure 4.15 LLS 920 R Expt. T=680 1.4 Z-Factor 1.9 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0.3 1.8 0.45 Z-Factor 1.3: Z-Factor comparison for LLS-EOS for Nitrogen.7 Z-Factor Comparison (Expt.35 1. P (Psia) Figure 4.Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt.6 1.95 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure.1 VdW-EOS T=100 F VdW-EOS T=220 F 1 VdW-EOS T=460 F 100 F EXP 0. T=560 Expt. 1.4: Z-Factor comparison for vdW-EOS for Methane. 72 9000 10000 . T=920 0.25 LLS 560 R LLS 680 R 1. VdW-EOS) 1. vs.05 Expt.5 1. LLS-EOS) 1.2 1.

4 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0.2 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Pressure. vdW-EOS) 1.6 Z-Factor Comparison (Expt. They are dependent on the difference in molecular size of components in a binary system and they are characterized by the following properties.j+1 > ki.6 VdW-EOS T=220 F VdW-EOS T=460 F 100 F EXP 0.j • Hydrocarbon components with the same molecular weight have a binary interaction coefficient of zero: ki.13 Development of Binary Interaction Parameters Binary Interaction Coefficient/Number (BIN): These binary interaction coefficients are used to model the intermolecular interaction through empirical adjustment of the (aα)m term as represented mathematically by Equation 4. (psia) Figure 4.38.8 VdW-EOS T=100 F 0.4 Z-Factor 1. 4. Vs. as summarized by Slot-Petersen39 (1987): • The interaction between hydrocarbon components increases as the relative difference between their molecular weights increases: k.5: Z-Factor comparison for vdW-EOS for Carbon dioxide.2 1 0.1.j = 0 73 .

) 1. al.3 0.7 0.0 Expt.6: Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 49 oF.9 Z-Factor 0.i 4.14 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Mixtures Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 49 oF (Simon et. Measured Corresponding states BWR EOS VdW LLS PR PT RK SRK SW TB 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.• The binary interaction coefficient matrix is symmetric: ki.j = kj.6 0. 74 3000 .2 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.

) 1.8 Z-Factor 0.4 0.8: Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 90 oF. al.3 0.7: Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 70 oF.7 0.) 1.5 PT 0.6 0. Measured Corresponding states BWR EOS VdW LLS PR PT RK SRK SW TB 0.8 0.3 1250 PR LLS 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.6 VdW RK SRK 0. al.0 Expt.Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 70 oF (Simon et.9 0. Measured Corresponding states BWR EOS VdW LLS PR PT RK SRK SW TB 0.5 0.0 Expt.2 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4. 75 3000 .7 0.9 TB Z-Factor 0. Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 90 oF (Simon et.4 0.

al.0 Z-Factor 0.) 1. Measured Corresponding states BWR EOS VdW LLS PR PT RK SRK SW TB 1.6 SRK PT LLS 0. 76 3000 .9: Z-Factor comparison for CO2-C1 mixture at 90 oF.8 TB 0.1 1.2 Expt.Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 120 oF (Simon et.3 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.9 0.5 PR 0.7 VdW 0.4 0.

2004 CO2-H2S-N2-C1-C2-C3-iC4-nC4iC5-nC5-nC6-C7+ 41. Authors Year System Reference No.2: Sources of Experimental Z-Factor. 71 Elsharkawy-Foda 1998 CO2-H2S-N2-C1-C2-C3-iC4-nC4iC5-nC5-nC6-C7+ 74 Satter-Campbell 1963 H2S-C1-C2 46 Elsharkawy Buxton-Campbell CO2-N2-C1-C2-C3 Simon-Fesmire-Dicharry-Vorhis 1977 CO2-N2-C1-C2-C3-nC4-nC5-nC6 87 Fluid Prop.15 Prediction Results for Z-Factor of Natural Gases Table 4. Package (Shell) 2003 CO2-N2-C1-C2-C3-iC4-nC4-iC5nC5-nC6-C7+ Private 77 . Sage-Reamer-Lacey 1950 C1-C2 8 Sage-Lacey-Schfaasma 1934 C1-C3 79 Reamer-Olds-Sage-Lacey 1944 C1-CO2 75 Reamer-Sage-Lacey 1951 C1-H2S 80 Reamer-Olds-Sage-Lacey 1942 C1-nC10 82 Reamer-Olds-Sage-Lacey 1945 C2-CO2 76 Reamer-Selleck-Sage-Lacey 1952 C2-N2 83 Reamer-Sage 1962 C2-nC10 84 Sage-Reamer-Lacey 1951 C3-CO2 77 Reamer-Olds-Sage-Lacey 1949 nC4-CO2 78 Reamer-Selleck-Sage-Lacey 1953 nC10-H2S 81 Wichert 1970 CO2-H2S-N2-C1-C2-C3-iC4-nC4iC5-nC5-nC6-C7+ 86 2002.4.

4.3: Gas Composition for Excelsior 6 Laboratory Data.05 0.0059 0.0091 0.0063 0.0102 0.0343 0.0149 0 0.0153 0.0042 0.0627 0.1 Results for Excelsior Laboratory Data Table 4.802 0 78 .8325 0.0242 0 0.0005 0.0005 0.0079 0.0625 0.063 0.0102 0. 121 0.0242 0 0.7767 0.0052 0.0195 0.7942 0 0. Fluid Prop.0179 0.0325 0.0185 0.813 0.0195 0.0143 0.0071 0.0111 0 Core Lab.0073 0.063 0.0052 0.0137 0.042 0.768 0. oF Z-Factor Produced Fraction of Dew Point Gas Liquid Saturation Vapor Phase Composition Carbon Dioxide Nitrogen Methane Ethane Propane iso-Butane n-Butane iso-Pentane n-Pentane Hexane (s) Heptane plus COMPARISON OF LABORATORIES AND FLUID PROPERTIES PACKAGE 3317 Fluid Prop.0005 0. Package 2615 Core Lab.813 0.0069 0.8321 0.2048 0 0 0.0334 0.0069 0.0005 0. Package 0.0153 0.0079 0.0343 0.0085 0.0045 0.171 0. Pressure (Psia) BHT.15.

8 0.4 0.1. Data from Excelsior 6 (FPP) at 581 oR Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 90 oF (Simon et.11: Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 90 oF (Simon et al. Measured Corresponding states BWR EOS VdW LLS PR PT RK SRK SW TB 1.0 0.). al.5 PT 0.20 Lab.10: Z-Factor for Sweet Natural Gas. 79 3000 .7 0. vdW LLS PR PT RK SRK SW Z-Factor 1.) Expt.3 1250 PR LLS 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.6 VdW RK SRK 0.09 0.76 715 1235 1755 2275 2795 3315 Pressure(psia) Figure 4.98 0.9 TB Z-Factor 0.87 0.

o

Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 120 F (Simon et. al.)
1.2

Expt. Measured
Corresponding states
BWR EOS
VdW
LLS
PR
PT
RK
SRK
SW
TB

1.1
1.0

Z-Factor

0.9
0.8

TB

0.7
VdW

0.6

SRK
PT
LLS

0.5

PR

0.4
0.3
500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Pressure (Psia)

Figure 4.12: Z-Factor Comparison Chart at 120 oF (Simon et al.).
4.15.2 Results for TTU Laboratory Data
1

0.9

LLS EOS

PE Lab.

Z-Factor

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Pressure, psia

Figure 4.13: 75% CO2 - Dry Gas at 100 oF for CO2 Sequestration.

80

5000

1

LLS

PE Lab.

Z-Factor

0.95

0.9

0.85
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Pressure, psia

Figure 4.14: 25% CO2 - Dry Gas at 160 oF for CO2 Sequestration.

4.15.3 Results for UCalgary Data
Table 4.4: Gold Creek Gas Composition.
GOLD CREEK 10-5

P (Psia)
4496
4815
4515
5015
5215
5515
6015
CO2

T (210
o
F)
0.93
0.948
0.966
0.984
1.003
1.032
1.061
H2S

0.0318
C1
0.7069
C7+
Fraction

0.0704
C2
0.0303
Mole.
Wt. 131

N2
Total Acid Gas
0.0401
C3
IC4
0.0209
0.0057
Sp. Gr. 0.785

NC4
0.0109

81

IC5
0.006

0.1022
NC5
0.0057

C6
0.0093

C7+
0.046

1.7

Expt.
VdW
LLS
PR
PT
RK
SRK
SW

VdW

RK

SRK

1.3
PT

SW

PR

1.1
LLS

0.9
4400

4700

5000

5300

5600

5900

6200

Pressure (Psia)

Figure 4.15: Z-Factor for sour natural gas, data from Excelsior 6 (FPP) at 581 oR
Shell Marmattan 10-33 @ 84 oF
1.6
Expt.

1.4

VdW-EOS
LLS-EOS
PR-EOS

1.2

PT-EOS
RK-EOS
SRK-EOS

Z-Factor

Z-Factor

1.5

1.0

SW-EOS
TB-EOS
TB
VdW

0.8
SRK

0.6

RK

SW
PT

PR
LLS

0.4

0.2
2014

2514

3014

3514

4014

4514

5014

Pressure (Psia)

Figure 4.16: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 84 oF.

82

Shell Marmattan 10-33 @ 73 oF 1. Sutte Plant.P Injection Line 1.4 2014 PR LLS 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.18 PR PT 1. 83 5014 .88 0.18: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 198 oF.17: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 73 oF.08 Z-Factor PT SRK TB VdW 1.03 PR LLS 0.23 VdW SW Expt. TB LLS 1.4 LLS-EOS PR-EOS PT-EOS RK-EOS 1.2 SRK-EOS TB Z-Factor SW-EOS TB-EOS 1.98 0.83 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.8 SRK RK SW PT 0.0 VdW 0.93 0. H.6 0.13 RK RK SRK SW 1. VdW-EOS 1.6 Expt.

20: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 100 oF.52 SW-EOS TB-EOS 0.68 PT-EOS SW-EOS TB-EOS 0. 84 .08 SW SRK Z-Factor 0.02 SW SRK 0.88 PR PT Expt. 0.18 TB VdW 1.78 PR-EOS RK-EOS SRK-EOS 0.12 VdW TB 1.42 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 5014 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4. o Fina WindFall Processing Plant (560 R) 1.92 Z-Factor PR RK 0.82 LLS PT Expt.19: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 50 oF.72 LLS-EOS VdW-EOS PR-EOS 0.Fina WindFall Processing Plant (510 oR) 1.58 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 5014 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.98 RK LLS 0.62 RK-EOS SRK-EOS PT-EOS 0. LLS-EOS VdW-EOS 0.

10 TB VdW 1.21: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 125 oF.90 LLS PR Expt.89 PT PR Expt.70 1014 SW-EOS TB-EOS 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 5014 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.99 SRK RK 0.80 SRK-EOS PT-EOS 0.22: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 150 oF.09 SRK SW RK LLS 0.00 Z-Factor Z-Factor 0.79 VdW-EOS PR-EOS RK-EOS SRK-EOS 0.59 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 5014 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4. 85 . Fina WindFall Processing Plant (610 oR) 1.75 0.Fina WindFall Processing Plant (585 oR) 1.85 VdW-EOS PR-EOS RK-EOS 0.15 1.20 1.19 TB VdW 1.95 PT 0. LLS-EOS 0.05 SW 1. LLS-EOS 0.69 PT-EOS SW-EOS TB-EOS 0.

1.14 PR-EOS VdW TB RK-EOS 1.89 0.89 0.84 0.24 Expt.09 Z-Factor 1. 1.24: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 200 oF. 86 5014 .o Fina WindFall Processing Plant (635 R) 1.99 PT 0.24 Expt. Fina WindFall Processing Plant (660 oR) 1.74 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.04 SRK-EOS PT-EOS SRK SW-EOS SW RK TB-EOS 0.04 TB-EOS SRK RK 0.09 VdW TB RK-EOS SRK-EOS PT-EOS SW SW-EOS Z-Factor 1.79 0.84 0.19 LLS-EOS VdW-EOS 1.94 LLS PR 0.14 PR-EOS 1.23: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 175 oF.94 LLS PR 0.74 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 5014 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.99 PT 0.19 LLS-EOS VdW-EOS 1.79 0.

14 VdW TB RK-EOS SRK-EOS 1.24 Expt.09 PT-EOS SRK SW-EOS Z-Factor 1.94 LLS PR 0.94 0.84 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.26: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 250 oF. 1.09 SRK SW TB-EOS RK 1.04 SW TB-EOS RK 0. LLS-EOS 1. 87 5014 .14 VdW SRK-EOS PT-EOS SW-EOS Z-Factor 1.24 Expt.84 0.89 0.74 1014 1514 2014 2514 3014 3514 4014 4514 5014 Pressure (Psia) Figure 4.99 PT LLS PR 0.19 LLS-EOS VdW-EOS PR-EOS 1.04 0.89 0.99 PT 0. o Fina WindFall Processing Plant (710 R) 1.25: Z-Factor comparison for sour natural gas mixture at 219 oF.19 VdW-EOS PR-EOS TB RK-EOS 1.79 0.o Fina WindFall Processing Plant (679 R) 1.

81 1179.0181 0.0052 0.0088 0.74 487.86 373.55 221 4973 0.0383 0.0081 0.0097 0.0576 0.011 0.0172 88 .0079 0.0052 0.0041 0.0651 0.0077 0.0084 0.0871 0.1693 0.968 1.0053 0.7284 0.0336 0.0011 0.0072 0.0418 0.997 296 4669 0.0171 0.0135 0.19 439 0.776 1151.0707 152 0.02 362.0163 0.005 0.0132 0.002 0.8616 0.1047 0.0035 0. IND H2S CO2 N2 C1 C2 C3 IC4 NC4 IC5 NC5 C6 C7+ Mw+ Sg+ Tc C7+.0036 0.4.0073 0.99 350.774 1109.0056 0.0059 0.72 409.0448 0.0706 0.0037 0. psia T (oF) P (psia) Z (Expt.0708 0.775 255 4050 0.0096 0.004 0.015 0.73 504 0 0.011 250 4190 0.818 1209.838 271 11830 1.0384 0.0083 0.0608 0.) LLS (This Study) 381.0156 0.4 Results for Elsharkawy Gas Data Table 4.0253 132 0.9883 1.0017 0.9749 1.6619 0.0564 253 0.0032 0.5917 0.4033 0.0261 144 0.0188 0.0121 0.0244 0.75 416 0.0055 0.0082 0.97 325 5095 1.0076 0.783 1165.0046 0.002 0.0026 0.7564 0.0847 0.426 Pc C7+.85 1368.5: Results of Elsharkawy Gas Data.0058 0.049 158 0.0991 165 0.2816 0.0104 0.0154 0.0656 154 0.0412 0.0064 0.0248 0.788 1144.0383 0.0355 0.7349 1.0046 0.15.581 84 0. oR 1 0 0.0124 0.64 752 0.7352 0.914 290 4255 0.6771 0.99 398.006 0.0044 0.0498 0.9 817 0.

9984 1000 0.0032 103 0.85 1074.0039 0.2327 0.8768 5014 0.1165 0.0451 0.02 Mole Fraction 1280 1714 0.008 125 0.0024 0.) Component IND H2S CO2 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ Mw+ Sg+ Tc C7+.0035 0.0328 5385 0.002 0.059 0.0002 0. psia T (oF) P (psia) Z (Expt.0028 0.0116 0.0103 0.0001 0.0 1202.5137 0.0431 0.0002 0.0046 0.) LLS (This Study) 1275 0.5213 0.0319 0. oR Pc C7+.26 189 405.0218 125 0.26 157 405.5601 0.1019 0.75 1074.1826 0.001 0.0085 0.1078 0.0866 0.0327 0.0287 0.002 0.068 0.8 .82 230 2347 0.27 1866 0.082 0.0003 0.7414 0.0 1277 0.711 0.26 216 394.0061 0.0282 0.0095 3514 0.0121 0.0142 0.0037 0.6857 0.76 120 272.011 0.0085 0 0.0209 0.0093 0.802 0.0258 0.823 0.004 0.5 (Contd.7 983.0057 0 0.0022 125 145 0.0084 0.93 250 422.75 1063.0027 0.0345 0.9151 5065 0.6459 0.931 1.Table 4.0012 0.0616 0.0304 0.75 0.942 0.0083 0.0061 0.0002 0.273 0.75 1074.56 405.4241 0.0047 0.0071 0.0007 0.0022 0.0004 120 0.8330 89 1788 0.0095 0 0 0.95 1.

psia Tc C7+. oR 191 0.763 466.0252 0.0817 0.9595 o T ( F) P (psia) Z (Expt.503 313 6010 1.6583 0.0091 nC4 0.0078 0.0208 iC5 0.0163 0.0944 C3 0.011 0.7559 0.) ρ (lb/cu.436 1105.79 313 2000 0.0402 0.023 0.17 313 3000 0.05 0.0184 0.ft.0258 0.0404 0.0266 N2 0.7485 0.0248 0.0096 0.52 120 0.0231 0.0282 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.0803 0.85 1264.4.0253 0.6: Z-Factor Results for Miscellaneous Gases.023 1177.0186 0.0069 0.0159 0.6 1066.5 Results for Elsharkawy Miscellaneous Data Table 4.21 115 0.0137 0.0905 0.007 0.0863 0.0073 0.9588 0.054 18.0166 0.0612 1.0411 0.7074 0.0239 0.0415 0.0086 0.0089 0.0062 0.586 1060. Rich Gas Condensate 283 284 0 0 Serial No.68 313 700 0.006 0.34 128 0.0839 0.27 313 1200 0.7292 C2 0.9675 .0417 0.0155 0.0067 0.0108 0.7583 0.0062 0.15.738 0.0073 0.0161 0.0614 1.0262 0.212 26.97 313 4100 0.60 154 0.007 0.9815 0.789 404.804 378.97 2.09 1081.77 447.93 6.831 324.3 313 5100 1.0092 C7+ 0. H2S 281 0 282 0 285 0 286 0 287 0 CO2 0.0495 iC4 0.98 113 0.0084 0.0086 0.0082 0.008 nC5 0.0082 0.765 460.0155 0.017 0.1268 0.0143 C1 0.927 9.0784 0.0116 0.0078 0.967 14.39 139 0.662 1136.952 3.0103 0.0075 0.0167 0.19 1.) LLS (This Study) 90 0.0447 0.0162 0.0242 0.0323 0.778 427.0107 nC6 0.0821 0.0097 0.

52 250 3000 0.4033 0.4807 0.0053 0.0496 0.006 0.732 1090.0476 0.012 0.0049 0.0096 0.0106 0.0493 0.28 1046.27 0.0494 C3 0.0608 0.0111 0.8055 0.764 486.8920 0.6 (Contd.006 0.838 27.0192 0.799 15.02 107 0.0049 0.0081 0.0052 0.661 1052.95 250 1200 0.0699 0.0383 0.42 121 0.8837 0.34 250 3600 0.0252 0.4331 C2 0.) ρ(lb/cu.4641 0.0066 0.014 iC5 0.06 250 2400 0.0214 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.06 250 700 0.806 19.735 1062.773 467.0057 0.0068 0.0051 0.0132 0.0694 0.289 445 0.778 453.0071 nC6 0.9009 0.4688 0.1 112 0. oR 165 0.0239 0.0461 0.0074 nC5 0.70 1209.935 2.0679 N2 0.70 107 0.0487 0.) LLS (This Study) 91 .006 0.0412 0.0106 0.842 7.28 250 4190 0.768 477.0455 0.0114 0.0058 0.809 11.0237 0.0277 iC4 0.0448 0.0069 0.79 109 0.0644 0.91 0.277 0.282 Highly Sour Gas Condensate 440 441 442 443 0.0063 0.0078 0.) Serial No.272 0.0243 0.0077 C7+ 0.0079 0.063 0.4382 0.0055 0. psia Tc C7+.0286 0.318 CO2 0. H2S 439 0.0434 0.522 1046.3 250 1800 0.0217 0.Table 4.0067 nC4 0.818 365.0481 0.0248 0.762 492.006 0.741 1075.762 492.0473 0.0054 0.0394 C1 0.0121 0.0685 0.888 5.0055 0.0471 0.9361 o T ( F) P (psia) Z (Expt.0669 0.273 444 0.0239 0.4844 0.0991 0.8698 0.9156 0.ft.0055 0.28 116 0.

0036 0.0085 0.929 139 0.) ρ(lb/cu.0031 0.7483 92 0.003 928 0.797 373.2084 0.0172 0.3173 110 0.87 219 1200 0.0082 0.7882 0.4246 106 0.003 932 0.777 30.017 0.6352 0.763 446.0039 nC5 0.Table 4. psia Tc C7+.7276 0.6706 0.0032 0.003 931 0.851 7.0088 0.58 219 2600 0.811 347.445 1131.0093 0.38 219 700 0.3509 1211. o R T (oF) P (psia) Z (Expt.0033 0.0046 nC6 0.0386 0.88 219 4100 0.0032 0.0308 0.0421 0.7222 0.6579 0.017 0.0039 0.0315 0.0051 0. H2S 926 0.0175 0.7551 0.6716 N2 0.0042 0.0035 0.003 0.1994 C2 0.0036 0.005 1100.0309 0.) LLS (This Study) 170 0.0097 iC5 0.0031 0.0088 0.1937 0.03 0.6395 0.0113 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.0101 0.915 4.943 1034.0303 0.041 0.0046 0.72 25.0049 0.003 927 0.227 1046.0033 0.8975 .004 CO2 0.719 19.0034 C7+ 0.003 929 0.ft.783 397.627 1071.2037 0.003 0.0551 0.0313 0.) Carbon Dioxide Rich Gas Serial No.003 930 0.2008 0.851 34.0411 0.0399 0.003 0.0458 0.0033 0.207 0.9 219 3300 0.0038 0.39 219 1900 0.0036 0.0038 0.601 1169.0042 0.0169 0.0318 C3 0.0307 0.0082 0.0202 0.0127 0.0417 0.0388 C1 0.003 0.755 469.0035 nC4 0.6514 0.515 219 4825 0.773 421.8437 0.8288 153 0.1988 0.8203 128 0.0047 0.0174 0.6639 0.0184 iC4 0.6873 118 0.0324 0.751 482.775 12.6 (Contd.

3 o 209 4786 1.947 3.0013 0.7106 126 0.0023 0.162 Tc C7+.Table 4.76 450.37 209 700 0.0232 0.5907 116 0.0082 0.787 390.0023 0. H2S 933 0 934 0 935 0 936 0 937 0 938 0 939 0 CO2 0.) LLS (This Study) 93 0.) ρ(lb/cu. psia 143 0.9467 C2 0.0082 0.0025 0.03 209 1300 0.0023 nC4 0.0025 0.758 456.0236 C3 0.758 456.133 1114.0077 0.023 0. oR 1142.0026 iC5 0.0082 0.9451 0.0012 0.0013 C7+ 0.0103 0.0033 0.0033 C1 0.0082 0.0008 0.78 1.4827 133 0.974 10.0231 0.0034 0.0063 0.0035 0.012 0.345 1058.42 209 3300 0.9468 0.006 Mw+ Sg+ Pc C7+.0012 nC5 0.5163 114 0.76 209 2600 0.933 6.0033 0.042 1075.0012 0.0033 0.0008 0.0036 0.777 409.0013 0.) Very light gas Serial No.0012 0.0025 0.0018 0.0069 0.0012 0.942 0.0033 0.0023 0.0033 0.0033 0.019 12.0231 0.0083 iC4 0.0025 0.3 1058.0012 0.763 438.0038 N2 0.0032 0.0013 0.023 0.0023 0.0025 0.419 1064.9252 0.9046 0.0082 0.9438 0.0013 0.13 209 4000 0.162 114 0.0023 0.8995 .0089 0.0012 0.0008 0.0008 0.92 209 1900 0.945 8.0023 0.0033 0.9569 0.769 423.0008 0.ft.0082 0.0012 0.6 (Contd.0009 nC6 0.93 120 0.9411 T ( F) P (psia) Z (Expt.0025 0.0008 0.933 5.9461 0.9113 0.9473 0.075 1093.0233 0.0035 0.969 1.0014 0.

Every other EOS can be derived from LLS EOS by substituting for α and β. A universal scaling factor has been developed for S-K Z-Chart which is capable of predicting z-factors of a. 1. 6.1 Conclusions This project establishes the need and a solution for a simple and robust technique of predicting z-factor values for sour reservoir gases and natural reservoir gases. Eight computational techniques available has been examined and Beggs and Brill computation technique has been used in the development of the scaling factor. Z-factor from Equations of state has been established. 94 .CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5. 3. Best-fit equations for Standing and Katz Z-Chart have been established. Improved technique for mixture critical property has been established. 4. Sour reservoir gases 5. 3100 experimental data from various sources were used in the development of scaling factor and also used for comparison purposes. Determination of accurate critical parameters of mixtures is an essential step to obtain accurate z-factor values. 2. LLS EOS is the most generalized EOS. Eight equations-of-state routinely used in the reservoir simulators have been examined and the most general EOS has been established. Natural gases b.

95 .2 Recommendations The following points can be based for further studies: 1. improvement in the generalized scaling of z using Standing-Katz chart based on law of corresponding principles. design of a generalized chart for predicting the amount of gas produced. 2.5.

REFERENCES

1. Amyx, J. W., Bass, Jr., D. M., and Whiting, R. L., Petroleum Reservoir
Engineering, (1960).
2. Craft, B. C., and Hawkins, M., Applied Petroleum Reservoir Engineering (2nd
Ed.). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (1991).
3. van der Waals, J. D., On the Continuity of the Liquid and Gaseous States, Ph.D.
Dissertation, Sigthoff, Leiden, (1873).
4. van der Waals, J. D., “The Equation of State for Gases and Liquids,” in Nobel
Lectures in Physics, December 12, (1910).
5. Standing, M. B., and Katz, D. L., “Density of Natural Gases,” Trans., AIME, 146,
140 (1942).
6. Standing, M. B., and Katz, D. L., “Vapor-Liquid Equilibria of Natural Gas-Crude
Oil Systems,” Trans., AIME, 155, 232 (1944).
7. Katz, D. L., Handbook of Natural Gas Engineering, McGraw: New York (1959).
8. Sage, B. H., and Lacey, W. N., Thermodynamic Properties of the Lighter Paraffin
Hydrocarbons and Nitrogen, Monograph on API Research Project 37, (1950).
9. Sage, B. H., Reamer, H. H., and Nichols, W. B., “Phase Equilibria in
Hydrocarbons Systems: Volumetric Behavior of n-Heptane,” Ind. Engr.
Chemistry, 47, 2219 (1955).
10. Stewart, D. E., Sage, B. H., and Lacey, W. N., “Volumetric Behavior of n-Hexane
in Liquid Phase,” Ind. Engr. Chemistry, 46, 2529 (1954).
11. Yarborough, L., and Hall, K. R., “A New EOS for Z-Factor Calculations,” Oil &
Gas J., 82 (1973).
12. Peng, D. Y., and Robinson, D. B., “A New Two Constants Equation of State,”
Ind. Eng. Chem. Fund., 15, 59 (1976).
13. Redlich, O., and Kwong, J., “On the Thermodynamics of Solutions. An Equation
of State. Fugacities of Gaseous Solutions,” Chemical Reviews, 44, 233 (1949).

96

14. Redlich, O., and Ngo, V. B. T., “An Improved Equation of State,” Ind. Eng.
Chem. Fund., 9, 287 (1970).
15. Redlich, O., “On the Three-Parameter Representation of the Equation of State,”
Ind. Eng. Chem. Fund., 14 (3), 257 (1975).
16. Reid, R. C., and Sherwood, T. K., The Properties of Gases and Liquids (1st Ed.).
McGraw, New York, (1958).
17. Reid, R. C., and Sherwood, T. K., The Properties of Gases and Liquids (2nd Ed.)
McGraw, New York, (1966).
18. Reid, R. C., Prausnitz, J. M., and Poling, B. E., The Properties of Gases and
Liquids (4th Ed.). McGraw-Hill, New York (1987).
19. Soave, G., “Equilibrium Constants from a Modified Redlich-Kwong Equation of
State,” Chem. Eng. Sci., 27, 1197 (1972).
20. Patel, N. C., and Teja, A. S., “A New Equation of State for Fluids and Fluid
Mixtures,” Chem. Eng. Sci., 77 (3), 463 (1982).
21. Kumar, N. H., and Starling, K. E., “The Most General Density-Cubic Equation of
State: Application to Pure Nonpolar Fluids,” Ind. & Eng. Chem., 21, 255 (1982).
22. Wichert, E., and Aziz, K., “Calculate Z’s for Sour Gases”, Hydro. Proc., 51, 119
(1972).
23. Dranchuk, P. M., and Abou-Kassem, J. H., “Calculation of Z-Factors for Natural
Gases Using Equations of State,” J. Cdn. Pet. Tech., 14, 34 (1975).
24. Schmidt, G., and Wenzel, H., “A Modified van der Waals Type Equation of
State,” Chem. Eng. Sci., 135, 1503 (1980).
25. Golan, M, and Whitson, C. H., Well Performance, 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall: New
Jersey (1991).
26. Trebble, M. A., and Bishnoi, P. R. "Development of a New Four-Parameter Cubic
Equation of State," Fluid Phase Equilibria, 35, 1 (1987).
27. van der Waals, J. D., “The Equations of State for Gases and Liquids,” in Nobel
Lectures in Physics 1901-1921, 254 (Amsterdam, 1967).
28. Lawal, A. S.,“A Consistent Rule for Selecting Roots in Cubic Equations of State,”
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 26 (4), 857 (1987).

97

29. Lawal, A. S., “Application of the Lawal-Lake-Silberberg Equation-of-State to
Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Fluid and Fluid Mixtures,”
Technical Report TR-4-99, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Texas Tech
University, Lubbock, Texas, (1999).
30. Lawal, A. S., van der Laan, E. T., and Thambynayagam, R. K. M., “FourParameter Modification of the Lawal-Lake-Silberberg Equation of State for
Calculating Gas-Condensate Phase Equilibria,” SPE 14269 in the Proceeding of
1985 Annual Technical Conference, Las Vegas, Sept. 22-25, (1985).
31. Lawal, A. S., Improved Fluid Property Predictors for Reservoir Compositional
Simulation, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Petroleum Engineering, The
University of Texas at Austin, (1985).
32. Lawal, A. S., van der Laan, E. T.: “A Partial Molar Fugacity Coefficient Useful
for Changing Mixing Rules of Cubic Equations-of-State,” Fluid Phase Equilibria,
95, 109 (1994).
33. Gopal, V.N., “Gas Z-Factor Equations Developed for Computer”, Oil and Gas Journal,
75, 58 (1977).

34. Jaeschke, Manfred, Ruhrgas, A. G., Audibert, A., Caneghem, P. V., Humphreys,
A. E., Pellei, Quinto, Janssen-van Rosmalen, Renee, Michels, J. P., and
Schouten, J.A.,“Accurate Prediction of Natural Gas Compressibility Factors by
GERG Virial Equation,” SPE 17766 in the SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
Dallas, Texas, June 13-15, (1988).
35. Jaeschke, Manfred, Ruhrgas, A. G., Janssen-van Rosmalen, Renee, and Schouten,
J.A.,“Simplified GERG Virial Equation for Field Use,” SPE 17767 at the SPE
Gas Technology Symposium, Dallas, Texas, June 13-15, (1988).
36. Buxton, T. S., and Campbell, J. M., “Compressibility for Lean Natural GasCarbon Dioxide Mixtures at High Pressure,” Paper SPE 1590 presented at SPE
41st Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, TX, Oct. 2-5, (1966).
37. Graboski, M. S., and Daubert, T. E., “A Modified Soave Equation of State for
Phase Equilibrium Calculations 1. Hydrocarbon System,” Ind. Eng. Chem.
Process Des. Dev., 17, 443 (1978).
38. Elliot, J., and Daubert, T., “Revised Procedure for Phase Equilibrium Calculations
with Soave Equation of State,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev., 23, 743
(1985).

98

New York (1973). “Non-Ideal Behavior of Gases and Their Mixtures. Texas. (2001). O. LA.” Paper SPE 566 presented at SPE Fall Meeting. 41. B.. Valderrama.. Volumetric and Phase Behavior of Oil Field Hydrocarbon Systems.. Eng. TX. Chem.. (1963). “The State of the Cubic Equations of State. Oct. Department of Petroleum Engineering. 48. S... Willman. 40. and Teja. S. 47. Dallas. and Chilton C. “Continuous Thermodynamics of Phase Equilibria Using a Multivariable Distribution Function and An Equation of State. Lubbock. Standing. A. McGraw-Hill. 49. H. 99 . M. New Orleans. A. MS Thesis. J.” AIChE Journal. A. Texas Tech University. “Revival of the van der Waals Classical Theory via Silberberg Constant. 6-9. 44. Soave. Binary Interaction Parameters for Critical Loci of Polar and NonPolar Systems. 1603 (2003).. “A Systematic and Consistent Approach to Determine Binary Interaction Coefficients for the Peng-Robinson Equation of State.” Ind.” Paper SPE 16941. T. “Universal Method for Equations of State (UNIFEST) An Application of UNIFAC to Predict the Parameters of Cubic Equations of State. presented at the 62nd Annual Technical Conference of the SPE. Texas. 193. (2002). September 27-30 (1987).. (2002).. A.. Society of Petroleum Engineers of AMIE. Perry. Dallas (1977). February 10-12. Oct. 45... Department of Petroleum Engineering..” Fluid Phase Equilibria. Lubbock. B. M. M. K. 42. Elsharkawy. MS Thesis. 43. Lawal.. 46. Texas Tech University. Prediction of Critical Properties for Mixtures of Carbon Dioxide and Reservoir Fluids.” Paper SPE 22712 presented at the 66th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineer. “Predicting the Properties of Sour Gases and Condensates: Equations of State and Empirical Correlations” Paper SPE 74369 presented at the Society of Petroleum Engineer International Petroleum Conferences and Exhibition. Villahermosa. 42. R. Dallas. 75 (2002).39. 12 (1986). C. Lal. Slot-Petersen. Campbell. M. Ortiz. G. T. Chemical Engineers’ Handbook (5th Ed.). H. 32 (2067). (2001). 6-9. TX.. J. B. Satter.

Des. T. Proc. “Thermodynamics of Petroleum Mixtures Containing Heavy Hydrocarbons. W. May 18. AIME.. 100 .. Thomassen. and Kurata. 16. and Chang. 56.” J. 58. J. Kansas City. M.. F. Ott.. L. Eng. Eng. Chem. 23.. Thomassen.” Ind. Proc. Des. “An Empirical Equation for Thermodynamics Properties of Light Hydrocarbons and Their Mixtures. Williard Gibbs. Chem.. B.”Phase and Volumetric Behavior of Natural Gases at Low Temperatures”.. Pet. J.50. R. Su. Chem. K. F. and Rubin. L. Jr... B.. 38 (8). “Improve Predictions of Enthalpy of Fractions. Gore. L.” J. P. Webb. 195. D. K. F. Pedersen. G. Chem. H. “Phase and Volumetric Behavior of Natural Gases at Low Temperatures and High Pressures”. Thermodynamics. Longmans: New York (1928). Proc. M. 6.. and Voo. December 8. Gouq-Jen.” in Nobel Lectures in Physics. 2. Pet. “An Internally Consistent Correlations for Predicting the Critical Properties and Molecular Weights of Petroleum and Coal-Tar Liquids.” Ind. Methane. Wilson. A. S. 334 (1940). and n-Butane. Ethane. 802 (1946).. C. A. “Comparisons of Equations of State in Effectively Describing PVT Relations. 163 (1984). C. 137 (1984).. Benedict. 279 (1952). Gibbs.. P.. I. F. 37 (1954). 55. F. I.. 61. A. Phase Envelope Calculations by Use of the Soave-Redlich-Kwong Equation of State. Flash and PVT Calculations with the SRK Equation of State. (1982). J.. Gore. Dev. G. P..” Ind. H. 566 (1984). 59.. Propane. 1. Twu. “Generalized Equation of State for Real Gases. and Kurata. Davis.” paper presented at the AIChE meeting. and Fredenslund. and Lee. 52. MO..T.. (1959). Burkhardt. Educ. 51. S. Davis. Tech. G. Pedersen.. The Collected Works of J. “Prediction of Pseudocritical Parameters for Mixtures... J. Chien-Hou. Goates. Chem. B.. 60. T. Bertuzzi. W. 153 (1976).. 48. C. Phys.. 23.. K. 1. 8. 55. and Hall. “The Renormalization Group and Critical Phenomena. Trans. C.. P.” Fluid Phase Equilibria. 515 (1971).. Kesler.” Hydro. Dev. 53. 54. Eng. S.. 57. Stewart. “Thermodynamics of Petroleum Mixtures Containing Heavy Hydrocarbons. and Fredenslund.

Eng. 19 (5-6).” Energy & Fuels. R. Van Ness. 63. Elsharkawy. 76-83 (1965). High Pressure Phase Behaviour of Multicomponent Fluid Mixtures.. 588 (1971).” Ind. R... Progr. J. 353-364 (1998). R. 73... S.” Ind. Am. Sci & Tech. Sadus. A. G. Experiment.. 218. L. Feb. “Prediction of Critical Properties of Mixtures” Rigorous Procedures for Binary Mixtures.” AIChE J. 1-4.. R. and Sadus. and Chao. “New Criticality Criteria for Equation-of-State Compositional Models. Eng.” SPE Poster Session Paper Presented at the 1987 SPE Ninth Symposium on Reservoir Simulation.” Advances in Thermophysical Properties at Extreme Temperatures and Pressures. 12 (2).. “Compressibility Factor for Gas Condensates. 46. 69... 711-731 (2001). Series. Y. S. Elsharkawy. “The Accuracy of Predicting Compressibility Factors for Sour Natural Gases. “Efficient Methods for Calculations of Compressibility.. Fundam. Symp. Fundam.. 65. 74. Hashem. Robinson Jr. Sadus. A. J. A.” Chem. 169 (2000).. San Antonio... C. A.” J. Lawal.. and Alikhan. M. 67. 68.. H.. AIChE J.. 64.. Density and Viscosity of Natural Gases. 71. R.. “The Critical Pressure of Multicomponent Mixtures. 807-816 (2001). 1-13 (2004). Elsharkawy. S. Y. C. R. 101 . R. A. R. Wei. 8. A. Elsharkawy. and Foda. S. “Calculating Critical Transitions of Fluid Mixtures: Theory vs. M. M. Joffe. K. Elsevier: Amsterdam (1992).” Fluid Phase Equilibria. A. and Abbot. Chem. J. K.. “Critical States of Mixtures and Equations of State. M. M. 40. 43 (1967). Classical Thermodynamics of Non Electrolyte Solutions. and Zudkevitch. Spear. McGraw: New York (1982). R. “Critical States of Ternary Mixtures and Equations of State.62. M. 1376 (1994).. and Elkamel. Chem.. L.. J.. C.. “Equations of State for the Calculation of FluidPhase Equilibria”.. 10. 66. Spear. Eng. “EOS Simulation and GRNN Modeling of the Constant Volume Depletion Behavior of Gas Condensate Reservoirs.. 70. 72. S. J. and Chao. A. Petrol.. 15 (4). R. Sutton. Engrs. Robinson Jr. Mech. K. D. Texas. Soc. 2 (1969).” Energy & Fuels. 63 (81)..

. “PEHS-45: Volumetric Behavior of Ethane-Carbon Dioxide System.. Chem. Eng. Reamer. Sage. Chem. W. Sage. H. H. Chem.. Reamer. 84. and Lacey. M. H. N.. N. and Sage. Selleck. Eng. 79. B. 12 (2). 80. B. Reamer. Chem.. H. N. 475-482 (1949). 102 . 976-981 (1951). 77.” Ind.” Ind. H.. H. 43 (11). H.. H. and Lacey. “EOS Simulation and GRNN Modeling of the Constant Volume Depletion Behavior of Gas Condensate Reservoirs. 76. H... 41 (3).” Ind.” Ind. T. H. W. 37 (7).. W. Reamer. Sage. H. H. Sage. H. 85. H.. Olds. Reamer.75.. Eng. Eng.. H. B.. Eng. H. H. Eng. B.. Reamer.” Energy & Fuels. B. R. R. Eng. “Phase Equilibria in Hydrocarbon Systems -53: Volumetric and Phase Behavior of the Mehane-Hydrogen Sulfide System. W. Olds. Reamer. Eng. and Lacey. W. and Lacey.” Ind. B. B. Sage.” Ind. 36 (1). H. 88-90 (1944). Chem. and Foda. H. H.” Ind. 81. Olds.. H.” Ind.. W. 34 (12). Chem.. T. N. 7 (2). W.” Ind... H. J. 26 (2). H. H. “The n-ButaneCarbon Dioxide System.. N. 2515-2520 (1951). 43 (4). F. Chem. Eng. Elsharkawy. H.. Chem.. 161-165 (1962). and Lacey... G... “Volumetric and Phase Behavior of the Propane-Carbon Dioxide System .... Reamer. H. A.... 353-364 (1998).” Ind. and Schaafsma. 82... H. 44 (1). Reamer.... N. Eng. F.. N. H. Chem. “PEHS-2: Methane-Propane System. 688-691 (1945). R. 198-201 (1952). Lacey. Sage. W. “Phase Equilibria in Hydrocarbon Systems -60: Volumetric and Phase Behavior of Decane-Hydrogen Sulfide System. B. N. 1526-1531 (1942). 45 (8). R. H.. H. H. 78. Selleck. “Phase Equilibria in Hydrocarbon Systems -37: Methane-Decane System. B. S. H. and Lacey. 83. Sage... W.. N. “Phase Equilibria in Hydrocarbon Systems -57: Volumetric Behavior of the Ethane-Nitrogen System.. “Phase Equilibria in Hydrocarbon Systems: Volumetric and Phase Behavior of the Ethane-n-Decane System. Olds. G. 214-217 (1934). “PEHS-41: MethaneCarbon Dioxide System in the Gaseous Region. Chem. Sage. Sage. 1810-1812 (1953). and Lacey.. B. and Lacey.

Piper. C. J. “Simplified monograph presentation. H.. “Compressibility Factors for Naturally Occurring Petroleum Gases.. Lin.. Q... and Vorhis. Research Report 28. Dev. Hydro. F. H. Simon. J. H. and Philips.. 95. Rowe. J. T. Jr... MS Thesis.” Hydrocarbon Process. 81-85 (1977). 15 (4). M. 21 (6). Y.. L. and Chao. 95-98 (1978). 380-393 (1980).... 58-70 (1942).” Paper SPE 24864. W... Eng. 93. 157 (1957). Chem. Data.” Energy & Fuels. 94. Hankinson. Peng. H... Meng.... K. Alberta (1970).86. E. M. Internally Consistent Correlation for Predicting Phase Composition of Heptane and Heavier Fractions. and Chen. Hashem. Robinson. 103 . D. Oct.” Ind. 153-158 (1984). “Prediction of Vapor-Liquid Equilibria of Undefined Mixtures.. and Alikhan. “High-Pressure Gas Measurement. A. and MacCain. 98. D. and Daubert.. J.. Y. and Ng. “PVTx Properties in the Gas Phase for Difluoromethane (HFC-32) Pentafluoroethane (HFC-125)”. 807-816 (2001). Washington. 88. D. MacCain W. H. Elsharkawy. Process..” Pet. Houston. C. 90. Oct. “Predict Natural Gas Properties. A. 19 (3).. E. L. Winn. S. Tulsa. 89. D. “Compressibility Factors for Naturally Occurring Petroleum Gases” Paper SPE 26668. DC. C... and Corredor. F. K. K. M. Wichert. A. 106-108 (1969). “Compressibility Factors for CO2-Methane Mixtures”. Dicharry. JPT 5052. Compressibility of Sour Natural Gases. A. Sim. 3-6 (1993). 87... Proc. Fesmire.. Duan. S. 91. Roland. A. L. and Katz. 97. Chem. R. 49. M. “Compressibility Factor for Gas Condensates. 36 (2). Kh. W.. 4-7 (1992). W. Refin. A. Piper..” Pet... “Capability of the Peng-Robinson Programs”.. D.. L.. Corredor. W. H. OK (1978). TX. B.” AIChE J. Eng. Refin. D.. Y. University of Calgary. characterization of petroleum fraction. Y. 1821-1826 (2004). R. J. T. presented at the SPE Annual Technical Meeting and Exhibition. L. Matthews. Thomas... R. J. 96. “Correlation of Critical Properties and Acentric Factor of Hydrocarbon Derivatives.. 30 (6). Jr. D. 92. Des.

Aa. March (1967). A. and Beggs. Accentric Factor.. 101. 115-116 (1980). Chem. Owens. T. D. Jr. Application of Molecular Refraction to the Principle of Corresponding States. and Campbell.99. 1-13 (1974). “Two-Phase flow in pipes. T. Res. 294-296 (1985). Katz. Eng. Elsharkawy. P. P.. Thomassen. 111. Refin. Dranchuk. (2nd Ed.. W. Brill.. 1014-1019.. Sept. V.. A. W. 102. and Fredenslund. Dev.” SPEJ.. D. Midland. and Alikhan. A. D. The Properties of Petroleum Fluids. and Starling. Buxton. S. K. 106. Riazi. T. 1.... “Correlation for Estimating Critical Constants. H. B. 137 (1989). M. L. M.” Hydrocarbon Process. Pedersen. Chem.. IP74-008.. University of Oklahoma (1968). March 21-23 (2000). McLeod.). R. Process. (1936).. S. and Daubert. T. 107. S. Advances in Thermodynamics. 108. The Huge (1974). S. M. 104 .. Y.. Eng. H.” Pet. K. K. E. Hashem. 103.” Paper SPE 59702 presented at the SPE 2000 Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference.. E. Kay.” Ind. Hydrocarbon Phase Behavior. Ahmed. M. and Dipole Moment for Undefined Coal – Fluid Fractions. 109. 24..D Thesis.. Chem. “Computer Calculation of Natural Gas Compressibility Factors Using the Standing and Katz Correlations. “Compressibility Factor for Gas Condensates..” Ind. J. R. S.. 21 (6) 64-70 (1942). and Daubert.” INTERCOMP Course. Houston (1989). R. Ph.. 80-86. MacCain... M. No. and Robinson. 110. “Density of Hydrocarbon Gases and Vapor at High Temperature and Pressure. R. “Compressibility Factors for Naturally Occurring Petroleum Gases. W.. “High Pressure Gas Measurement. 100. A... B. PennWell Books: Tulsa (1990). Purvis. Riazi. 104. P. J.. 755-759 (1987). D. TX. Eng. E. 105. of Petroleum Technical Institute Series.. Gulf Publishing Co.” Inst. 26 (24). Watansiri.” Ind. Des... “Simplify Property Prediction. “Characterization Parameters for Petroleum Fractions.

“Better Compressibility Factors.” AIChE J. R. “Comparison Made for Computer Z-Factor Calculation.. Takacs. P. Proc. 105 . 20. 610-620 (1972). R.. Jr. Sutton. J. R.” J. and Jacoby. L. 548-550 (1964).. 22-25 (1985). Las Vegas. 141-145 (1965).” Oil & Gas J. R. 113.112. H. July. Simon. 116. 44 (4)... 83. 64-66 (1976). and Briggs. E. “Evaluating Constant-Volume Depletion Data.. Whitson.. C. Robinson.. “Compressibility Factors for High Molecular Weight Reservoir Gases. 115. Sept. Pet. March. 10 (4). December. G.” Hydro. “Application of Benedict-Webb-Rubin Equation of State to Hydrogen Sulfide Mixtures.” Paper SPE 14265 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Meeting and Exhibition.. H.. 114. Tech. April...

2) 2 w c 2 w c (A.8) Z-Form of the LLS-EOS is as follows: Φ 3 Z 3 +Φ 2 Z 2 + Φ 1 Z + Φ 0 = 0 (A.763758ω + 0.309833 + 1.7) where. θc = 0.13) 106 .10) (A. Φ 3 = 1.005783 ω Mw (A.9) where.4) 2 c R T Pc (A.363589ω3 − 4.0 Φ 2 = −[1 + (1 − α)B] [ (A.3) 3 (A.12) ] Φ1 = A − αB − (β + α )B2 Φ 0 = − ⎡AB − β( B 2 + B3 ) ⎤ (A.APPENDIX A REDUCED FORM OF CUBIC EQUATIONS OF STATE A.1 Lawal-Lake-Silberberg Reduced Equation of State RT a (T ) P= − 2 V − b V + αbV − βb 2 α= 1 + Ω w Z c − 3Z c Ω w Zc β= Z (Ω w − 1) + 2Ω Z + (1 − 3Z c )Ω w Ω Z 2 c 3 Ω a = (1 + (Ω w − 1) Z c ) a = Ωa b= 2 (A.1) (A.720661ω2 − 1.5) Ω b RTc Pc − a (T) = aTR (A.6) θc 2 (A.11) (A.

5 1 (A.14) (A.26) 2 c R T Pc (A.19) α m = ∑∑ x i x jα i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) 1 i 0 .25) a (T ) = a (A.24) (A.15) Mixing Rules 1 1 a m = ∑∑ x i x j a i 2 a j 2 a ij i 1 ⎤ ⎡ b m = ⎢∑ x i b i 3 ⎥ ⎣ i ⎦ a ij = a ij = (A.16) j ωi ωj 3 (A.5 (A.27) P= a = Ωa 2 (A.22) A.18) ωj for ωi > ω j ωi (A.17) for ωi ≤ ω j (A.21) j a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (A.375) 3 (A.23) (A.29) Z-Form of the vdW-EOS is as follows: 107 .28) Ω Z RT b= w c c Pc (A.20) j β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 1 0 .2 van der Waals Reduced Equation of State a (T ) RT − 2 V−b V α=0 β=0 Ω a = (1 + (Ω w − 1) Z c ) 3 = (1 + (Ω w − 1)0.a (T ) P R 2T 2 bP B= RT A= (A.

31) (A.42) j a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (A.37) j b m = ∑ x i bi (A.40) α m = ∑∑ x i x j α i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) i 0 .33) Φ 0 = − ⎡AB − β( B + B ) ⎤ = −[ AB] 2 3 (A.39) ωj for ωi > ω j ωi (A.5 1 1 (A.0 (A.35) (A.43) A. Φ 3 = 1.3 Redlich-Kwong Reduced Equation of State P= a (T ) RT − 2 V − b V + bV (A.32) Φ 2 = −[1 + (1 − α)B] = −[1 + B] Φ1 = A − αB − (β + α)B2 = [A] [ ] (A.44) 108 .34) where a(T)P A= 2 2 R T bP B= RT (A.5 (A.30) where.36) Mixing Rules: a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij 1 i 1 (A.38) i a ij = a ij = ωi ωj for ωi ≤ ω j (A.Φ 3 Z 3 +Φ 2 Z 2 + Φ 1 Z + Φ 0 = 0 (A.41) j β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 1 0 .

53) Φ1 = [ A − B − B ] 2 (A.55) where.42751 a = 0.58) j b m = ∑ x i bi (A.46) Ω a = 0.49) 1 a TR a (T ) = (A.48) RTc Pc (A. Φ 3 = 1.56) (A.0 (A.42747 b = 0.50) Z-Form of the RK-EOS is as follows: Φ 3 Z 3 + Φ 2 Z 2 + Φ1 Z + Φ 0 = 0 (A.47) 2 2 c R T Pc (A.52) Φ 2 = −1.08664 (A.51) where.54) Φ 0 = −[AB] (A.61) 109 .57) Mixing Rules a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij 1 i 1 (A.45) (A.0 β = 0.0 (A.0 (A.60) for ωi > ω j (A.α = 1. a (T ) P R 2T 2 bP B= RT A= (A.59) i a ij = a ij = ωi ωj ωj ωi for ωi ≤ ω j (A.

4 Soave-Redlich-Kwong Reduced Equation of State a (T ) RT − 2 V − b V + bV α = 1.66) 2 c R T Pc (A.0 Φ 2 = −1.42751 P= a = 0. R T B= bP RT Mixing Rules: 1 1 a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij i (A.574ω − 0.0 Ω a = 0.61) j a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (A.67) RT b = 0.71) j b m = ∑ x i bi (A.0 β = 0.62) j β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 0 .α m = ∑∑ x i x jα i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) 1 i 0 . a (T ) P A= 2 2 .0 + (0.0 − T )] a 2 0.0 Φ 1 = [A − B − B 2 ] Φ 0 = −[AB] where.64) (A.42747 2 (A.69) Z-Form of the SRK-EOS is as follows Φ 3 Z 3 + Φ 2 Z 2 + Φ1 Z + Φ 0 = 0 (A.63) (A.72) i 110 .08664 c Pc (A.62) A.176ω )(1.48 + 1.5 R 2 (A.70) Φ 3 = 1.5 1 (A.68) a (T) = [1.5 1 (A.65) (A.

0 Φ 2 = − [1 − B] Φ1 = [A − 2B − 3B 2 ] Φ 0 = − [ AB − ( B 2 + B3 )] A= a (T ) P .76) j a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (A.73) ωj a ij = for ωi > ω j ωi (A.26992ω )(1.07780 c Pc (A.07780 a = 0.5 Peng-Robinson Reduced Equation of State a (T ) RT − 2 V − b V + 2bV − b 2 α = 2.85) Z-Form of the PR-EOS Φ 3 Z 3 + Φ 2 Z 2 + Φ1 Z + Φ 0 = 0 (A.5 R 2 (A.0 β = 1 .75) j β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 0 .0 (A.5 1 (A.86) Φ 3 = 1.84) a (T) = [1.80) Ω b = 0.ωi ωj a ij = for ωi ≤ ω j (A.45724 (A.77) A.78) (A.45724 (A.82) 2 2 c R T Pc (A. R 2T 2 B= bP RT 111 .37464 + 1.83) RT b = 0.0 − T )] a 2 0.81) P= (A.5 1 (A.74) α m = ∑∑ x i x jα i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) 1 i 0 .79) Ω a = 0.54226ω − 0.0 + (0.

99) a (T) = aα(TR .Mixing Rules a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij 1 i 1 (A. k ) = (1 + k (TR . (A.88) i ωi ωj a ij = for ωi ≤ ω j (A. k ) α (TR .465 + 1.347ω − 0.87) j b m = ∑ x i bi (A.94) βc = smallest positive root of the above equation.6 Schmidt-Wenzel Reduced Equation of State P= RT a (T ) − 2 V − b V + (1 + 3ω)bV − 3ωb 2 (A.98) R.90) β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 1 0 . k 0 )(1 − TR )) where.101) 2 k 0 = 0.102) 112 .97) 3 R 2 Tc2 Pc (A.92) A.96) (A.93) (6ω + 1)β3c + 3β c2 + 3β c − 1 = 0 (A.91) j a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (A.95) Ω b = ζ cβ c Ω a = (1 − ξ c (1 − β c )) a = Ωa (A.Tc b = Ωb Pc (A.528ω2 (A.89) ωj a ij = for ωi > ω j ωi (A. ζc = 1 3(1 + β c ω) (A.5 (A.100) (A.

113 .0 + (1. k 0 ) = k 0 + . k 0 ) for TR > 1.111) ∑ x ω (M ) i i i w i x i (M w )i (A.0 (A.0 + 3ω))B] Φ3 : A − (1.106) j b m = ∑ x i bi (A.(5TR − 3k 0 − 1) 2 k (TR .0 + 3ω)B − (1 + 6ω)B 2 ] − [AB − 3ω(B 2 + B 3 )] = 0 (A.0 + 3ω) B − (1 + 6ω)B 2 Φ0 : − [AB − 3ω(B 2 + B 3 )] A= a (T ) P (RT ) 2 B= bP RT Mixing Rules: 1 1 a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij i (A. for TR ≤ 1.108) ωj for ωi > ω j ωi (A.103) (A.109) α m = 1 + 3ωm (A.105) Φ1 : 1.112) where Mwi is the component’s molecular weight.0 − (1.0 − (1.0 + 3ω))B]Z 2 + [A − (1.104) Z-Form of SW-EOS: Z 3 − [1.110) β m = −3ωm ωm = (A.0 70 k (TR . k 0 ) = k (1.0 Φ2 : − [1.0 + (1.107) i a ij = a ij = ωi ωj for ωi ≤ ω j (A.

076799 ω + 0.118) Ω b .0 − C) Z 2 + (A − 2BC − B2 − B − C) Z − [AB − (B + B2 )C] = 0 Φ1 : 1.115) F = 0. α (TR ) = [1 + F(1 − TR1 / 2 )]2 (A.7 Patel-Teja Reduced Equation of State P= RT a (T ) − 2 V − b V + (b + c)V − cb (A.117) (A.120) pick the smallest positive root = Ω b a (T) = aα(TR ) (A.295937 ω 2 (A.A.113) Z-Form of PT-EOS Z3 − (1.329032 − 0.121) A= a (T ) P (RT ) 2 a= Ω a (RTc ) Pc B= bP RT b= Ω b RTc Pc C= cP RT c= Ω c RTc Pc 2 Mixing Rules: a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij 1 i 1 (A.0 Φ 2: -(1.114) where.0-C) Φ 3: A − 2BC − B 2 − B − C Φ 0: .123) i cm = ∑ x ici (A.124) i 114 .452413 + 1.122) j b m = ∑ x i bi (A.119) (A.0211947 ω 2 Ω c = 1− 3Zc (A.30982 ω − 0.116) Z c = 0. solve Ω + (2 − 3Z c )Ω + 3Z Ω b − Z = 0 3 b 2 b 2 2 c 3 c Ω a = 3 Zc + 3(1 − 2Zc )Ω b + Ω + 1 − 3Zc 2 b (A.AB + (B + B 2 )C (A.

3( ZC − 0.063 × Zc 1/ 2 (A.133) p = 0.12ω − 0.475 + 2. 2 .125) ωj a ij = for ωi > ω j ωi (A.134) − (TR ) }{1 − (TR ) }] 1/ 2 ξ c = 1.128) j a ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) (A.136) 115 .ωi ωj a ij = for ωi ≤ ω j (A.132) -1 (A.B= a ( T ) = Ω a α ( TR ) bP RT . A= a (T ) P 2 R T where .7) 1/ 2 R 1/ 2 -1 (A.0 Φ 2 : − (1 − C) Φ 3 : (A − 2BC − B 2 − B − C − D 2 ) − [AB − (B + B 2 )C − (B + 1)D 2 ] Φ0 : where.126) α m = ∑∑ x i x jα i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) 1 i 0 .135) (A.131) Φ1 : 1.3) p = 0.130) Z-Form of the TB-EOS Equation Z3 − (1 − C)Z 2 + (A − 2BC − B2 − B − C − D 2 )Z − [AB − (B + B2 )C − (B + 1)D 2 ] = 0 (A.854ω + 9.5 1 (A. D= dP RT R 2 Tc2 Ω RT Ω RT Ω RT .b = b c .c = c c .662 + 3.d = d c Pc Pc Pc Pc 2 m = 0.62ω + 4.06ω for M > 128 g mol 2 α (TR ) = [[1 + m(1 − T )] + p{(0.8 Trebble-Bishnoi-Salim Reduced Equation of State P= RT a (T ) − 2 V − b V + (b + c)V − bc − d 2 (A.0ω for M ≤ 128 g mol (A.613 + 0.5 1 (A.127) j β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 0 .129) A. C= cP RT .

Ω a = 3ξ c2 + 2Ω b Ω c + Ω b + Ω c + Ω 2b + Ω d2 Ωd = Vc 3 .137) Ω + ( 2 .139) j b m = ∑∑ x i x j b i 2 b j 2 b ij 1 i 1 j 1 1 c m = ∑∑ x i x j c i 2 c j 2 c ij i a ij = a ij = j ωi ωj for ωi ≤ ω j ωj for ωi > ω j ωi α m = ∑∑ x i x jα i 2 α j 2 (α i α j ) 1 i 0 .5 j a ij = b ij = c ij = (a i a j ) = (α i α j ) = (β i β j ) 116 . 0 ξ Ω b − ( Ω + ξ ) = 0 3 b 2 b 2 c 2 d 3 c (A.Ω c = 1.0ξ c (A.0 − 3.0 Mixing Rules 1 1 a m = ∑∑ x i x ja i 2 a j 2 a ij i (A.5 1 j β m = ∑∑ x i x jβ i 2 β j 2 (β i β j ) 1 i 1 0 . 0 − 3 . 0ξ c ) Ω + 3.138) Ω b = the smallest positive root in the above equation.

0144 0.0005 He 0.0019 0.0016 0.0022 nC6 0.0030 0.0005 0.7961 0.0020 0.0000 0.0021 0.0039 0.0191 0.6870 0.0004 0.0000 Table B.8313 0.0108 0.0025 N2 0.1611 0.0018 0.0015 iC5 0.0327 0.0033 0.0090 0. Mix No.7364 C3 0.0038 0.0006 0.0399 0.0029 0.0101 0.0033 0.0013 0.1 (Contd.0015 0.0149 0.0148 0.0000 0.7665 0.0060 0.2441 0.0335 0.0143 0.0000 C7+ 0.0018 0.0017 0.0007 0.0029 0.0023 0.0000 0.2400 C1 0.0019 0.0020 0.0012 0.0120 0.0020 0.0365 0.0012 0.0028 0.0035 0.0000 He 0.0039 iC5 0.0069 0.0060 0.0080 0.0174 0.0000 117 0.0040 0.0006 0.0079 0.0091 0.1146 0.0012 0.0069 0.0019 0.0000 0.0000 0.0012 0.9027 0.8532 C3 0.0110 0.0014 0.0065 0.0005 0.0139 0.0010 nC4 0.0198 iC4 0.0079 0.APPENDIX B PREDICTION RESULTS FOR PSEUDOCRITICAL PARAMETERS B.0000 0.9668 0.0030 0.0055 0.0100 0.0033 0.0034 0.0007 0.0028 0.0100 0.0884 0.0020 N2 0.1350 0.0171 0.0030 0.0000 0.1130 0.0070 0.0015 0. 47-1 26-1 26-2 26-3 47-2 26-4 26-5 CO2 0.0004 0.0014 0.0015 0.0060 0.0051 0.0087 0.0004 C7+ 0.0000 0.0044 0.0053 iC4 0.8906 0.0060 0.0000 0.0004 nC6 0.0023 0.0013 0.0000 0.0000 .10 Pseduocritical Parameter Results Table B.0011 0.0020 0. 26-6 26-7 CO2 0.8286 0.0014 0.0109 0.0031 0.7515 0.0000 0.0149 0.9089 0.0134 0.8580 0.0705 C1 0.0018 0.0016 0.0040 0.7625 0.) Mix-1 Mix-2 26-8 Mix-3 Mix-4 0.0037 0.0052 0.0005 nC5 0.0160 0.0000 Mix No.1: Gas Composition Description.0000 0.0010 0.0000 0.0150 0.0011 0.0038 0.0000 nC5 0.0037 nC4 0.

0089 0.0000 0.0299 0.0430 0.0000 N2 C1 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ He Mixture 47-1 (Gore Data) 500 400 C ritical T em p eratu re ( o R ) Kay Joffe PG LK VNA SBV Pedersen LM SC Sutton SC Sutton LLS Expt.7644 0.0936 0.1 (Contd.0135 0.0202 0. 118 . TTP 300 200 100 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property VNA Methods Pedersen LM Figure B.0011 0.0129 0.7507 0.0355 0.0014 0.1: Critical temperature prediction for Gore Data (Mix 47-1).0106 0.0094 0.0140 0.1961 0.0079 0. LLS Expt.0825 0.0164 0.0343 0. Mix-5 Mix-6 Mix-7 CO2 0.0138 0.0542 0.0443 0.0186 0.Table B.0079 0.0000 0.0128 0.4534 0.) Mix No.0000 0.0078 0.0120 0.

Mixture 26-1 (Gore Data) 1000 LLS Expt. 800 Critical Pressure (psia) Kay Joffe PG LK SBV VNA Pedersen LM SC Sutton SC Sutton 600 TTP 400 200 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property Methods VNA Pedersen LM Figure B.3: Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-1). Critical Pressure (psia) 800 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV VNA Pedersen LM SC Sutton SC Sutton 600 TTP 400 200 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property Methods VNA Pedersen LM Figure B. LLS Expt. 119 .2: Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 47-1).Mixture 47-1 (Gore Data) 1000 LLS Expt. LLS Expt.

TTP o Critical Temperature ( R) 300 200 100 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property VNA Methods Pedersen LM SC Sutton Figure B. Critical Pressure (psia) 800 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV VNA Pedersen LM SC Sutton 600 TTP 400 200 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property Methods VNA Pedersen LM SC Sutton Figure B. LLS Expt. 120 . LLS Expt.4: Critical temperature prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-2).5: Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-2.Mixture 26-2 (Gore Data) 400 Kay Joffe PG LK VNA SBV Pedersen LM SC Sutton LLS Expt. Mixture 26-2 (Gore Data) 1000 LLS Expt.

121 . LLS Expt. Critical Pressure (psia) 860 645 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV VNA Pedersen LM SC Sutton SC Sutton TTP 430 215 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property Methods VNA Pedersen LM Figure B. o Critical Temperature ( R) 300 TTP 200 100 0 Kay Joffe PG LK SBV Critical TTP Property Methods VNA Pedersen LM SC Figure B.6: Critical temperature prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-3).7: Critical pressure prediction for Gore Data (Mix 26-3).Mixture 26-3 (Gore Data) 400 Kay Joffe PG LK VNA SBV Pedersen LM SC Sutton LLS Expt. Mixture 26-3 (Gore Data) 1075 LLS Expt. Sutton LLS Expt.

5. TR graph. 4. Obtain a and b for each component. Mixtures follow the following Mixing rule: 122 . obtain the best fit-curve and the corresponding equation in the form of z SF = a × e − bTR for each pure component. and C are constants. B. The scaling factor expressions for: a. Z SF = TRθ … (3. ωMw graph.APPENDIX C SCALING FACTOR DEVELOPMENT AND RESULTS The following three forms of the scaling parameter were tested and the exponential form was selected based on its prediction and matching capability: [ ( Z SF = 1 + k 1 − TR )] 2 … (3. z SF = 2.20). Plot zSF vs. Plot b vs. 1. Pure Components z SF = a exp(bTR ) where. The step-by-step procedure for obtaining the scaling factor is as follows: z SK × zc z Expt . Plot a vs. Z SF = aEXP(bTR ) … (3. obtain the best fit-curve and the corresponding equation of the form b = [Aω 2 + Bω + C] where A. ω graph. a = coeff1 (ωM w ) coeff 2 b = [Aω 2 + Bω + C] b. 3.18). obtain the best fit-curve and the corresponding equation of the form a = coeff1 (ωM w ) − coeff 2 .19).

A.05 0.1 Scaled Z-Factor Results Buxton & Campbell at 160 oF (Mix-4) 1.5 ⎞⎟ ⎝ i ⎠ 2 where a.45 Expt. and C belong to the above described procedure only.⎛ n ⎞ ω m = ⎜ ∑ x i ω i0.1: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 160 oF (Mix-4).35 Scaled Z-Factor 1.25 1.95 0. 123 . C.000 6.000 Pressure (Psia) Figure C. B. b.85 0.15 1.000 8.5 ⎟ ⎝ i ⎠ 2 n [ω M w ] = ⎛⎜ ∑ x i [ω M w ]i0.75 0 2.000 4. SK 1.

8 0 2.82 0.32 Scaled Z-Factor 1. 124 . Quadratic 1.12 1. Mix-3.3 Z-Factor 1. Mix-4.42 Exp SK 1.72 0 2.000 6.000 4.Buxton & Campbell. T = 160 F 1.92 0.000 Pressure (psia) Figure C.22 1. Buxton & Campbell. T = 130 F.4 Exp SK Scaled 1.000 8.9 0.1 1 0.000 8.000 6.3: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 160 oF (Mix-3).000 Pressure (psia) Figure C.2 1.000 4.02 0.2: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 130 oF (Mix-4).

000 Pressure (psia) Figure C.36 Exp SK Scaled Z-Factor 1.4: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 130 oF (Mix-3).Buxton & Campbell.000 8.21 1.000 Pressure (psia) Figure C. Mix-3.000 4.76 0 2.000 8.76 0 2.000 4.06 0. Buxton & Campbell. T = 100 F. Mix-3.86 0.91 0.000 6.26 Scaled Z-Factor 1.000 6. Quadratic 1.36 Exp SK 1.06 0.5: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 100 oF (Mix-3).16 1. 125 . T = 130 F 1.96 0.

Quadratic 1. 126 . Mix-2. Buxton and Campbell Data.85 0 2. Quadratic o 160 F 1.8 0 2.15 Z-Factor 1.6: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 130 oF (Mix-2).2 Exp SK Scaled Z-Factor 1.Buxton & Campbell. SK 1.7: Scaled z-factor result for Buxton & Campbell Data at 160 oF (Mix-1).000 6. T = 130 F.000 Pressure (psia) Figure C.000 4.25 Scaled 1.000 Pressure (Psia) Figure C.000 8. Mix-1.95 0.9 0.1 1 0.000 8.05 0.000 6.000 4.35 Expt.

99 Expt. Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Exp.2: Z-Factor comparison for RK-EOS for Methane. 0.14 RK-EOS 560 R 1. 127 9000 . vdW-EOS) 1. T=680 0.22 1.29 Z-Factor 1.25 1.95 220 F EXPT.85 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Pressure (psia) Figure D.45 Z-Factor 1. vs.55 1.07 RK-EOS 680 R RK-EOS 920 R 0. Vs. P (Psia) Figure D.1: Z-Factor comparison for vdW-EOS for Nitrogen.37 1. T=920 0.92 Expt.35 1. RK-EOS) 1.84 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure. VdW-EOS T=460 F 100 F EXPT. 460 F EXPT.APPENDIX D PREDICTION OF Z-FACTOR FOR PURE SUBSTANCES D.1 Prediction Results by Equations of State Method Z-Factor Comparison (Expt. T=560 Expt.15 VdW-EOS T=100 F 1.05 VdW-EOS T=220 F 0.

P (Psia) Figure D. P (Psia) Figure D. T=920 0. T=680 0.21 RK-EOS 560 R RK-EOS 680 R 1.3: Z-Factor comparison for RK-EOS for Carbon dioxide. vs.Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt. vs.53 RK-EOS 920 R Expt.4: Z-Factor comparison for RK-EOS for Nitrogen. T=560 Expt.98 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure. Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt.13 0.36 Z-Factor 1. 128 9000 .38 Expt. T=920 0.83 0.06 Expt. T=560 Expt.28 1.13 RK-EOS 920 R Expt. RK-EOS) 1. RK-EOS) 1.68 RK-EOS 560 R RK-EOS 680 R 0.98 Z-Factor 0.43 1. T=680 1.23 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure.

8 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Pressure(psia) Figure D.4 Z-Factor 1.5 SOAVE-REDLICH-KWONG(C1) vs.3 1. 129 10000 .3 SOAVE-REDLICH-KWONG(CO2) vs.1 T=100 F T=220 F T=460 F 1 100 F EXP 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0.86 0.2 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Pressure(psia) Figure D.08 Z-Factor 0.64 T=100 F T=220 F T=460 F 100 F EXP 0. Experimental Z-Factor Comparison Plot 1.9 0. 1. Experimental Z-Factor Plot 1.42 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0.2 1.6: Z-Factor comparison for SRK-EOS for Carbon dioxide.1.5: Z-Factor comparison for SRK-EOS for Methane.

7: Z-Factor comparison for SRK-EOS for Nitrogen. vs. Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt.80 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure (Psia) Figure D.15 Z-Factor 1.20 1.95 PR-EOS 920 R Expt.05 460 F EXP 0.95 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Pressure(psia) Figure D.15 T=460 F 100 F EXP 220 F EXP 1.8: Z-Factor comparison for PR-EOS for Methane. Experimental Z-Factor Comparison Plot 1.00 PR-EOS 560 R PR-EOS 680 R 0.55 1. 130 9000 .25 T=100 F T=220 F 1. T=560 0.25 1. PR-EOS) 1. T=680 Expt.SOAVE-REDLICH-KWONG(N2) vs.45 Z-Factor 1.10 1.85 0.05 1.90 Expt. T=920 0.35 1.

T=680 1.9 Z-Factor 0.6 T = 560 R T = 680 R 0. vs.7 0.2 1.4 Expt.1 PR-EOS 920 R Expt. T=560 Expt.3 Z-Factor 1. PR-EOS) 1.8 0. T=920 1.0 Expt.0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure (Psia) Figure D. T=680 Expt.0 0.3 0.1 PR-EOS 560 R PR-EOS 680 R 1. PR-EOS) 1.9: Z-Factor comparison for PR-EOS for Carbon dioxide.3 1. Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt. 131 9000 .5 T = 920 R Expt. P (Psia) Figure D.2 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure. vs.2 1.10: Z-Factor comparison for PR-EOS for Nitrogen.Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt. T=560 0.4 1. T=920 0.

6 SW-EOS 100 F 0. 132 10000 .2 1.9 460 F EXP 0.12: Z-Factor comparison for SW-EOS for Carbon dioxide.2 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure (psia) Figure D.3 460 F EXP 0.7 0. SW-EOS) 1.9 Z-Factor 0. Vs. SW-EOS) 1.4 100 F EXP 220 F EXP 0.3 1.11: Z-Factor comparison for SW-EOS for Methane.5 Z-Factor Comparison (Expt.2 Z-Factor Comparison (Expt.1.8 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 P (psia) Figure D.4 Z-Factor 1.1 1 0. Vs. 1.8 0.1 SW-EOS 100 F SW-EOS 220 F 1 SW-EOS 460 F 100 F EXP 220 F EXP 0.5 SW-EOS 220 F SW-EOS 460 F 0.

T=680 Expt. Vs.33 1. P (Psia) Figure D.45 1.55 1.13 PT-EOS 560 R 1.23 Z-Factor Z-Factor 1.83 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure. vs. 133 9000 10000 .25 SW-EOS 100 F SW-EOS 220 F 1.05 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0. T=920 0. Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Exp.03 PT-EOS 680 R PT-EOS 920 R Expt. PT-EOS) 1.35 1. SW-EOS) 1.93 Expt.95 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 P (psia) Figure D.14: Z-Factor comparison for PT-EOS for Methane.Z-Factor Comparison (Expt.15 SW-EOS 460 F 100 F EXP 1. T=560 0.13: Z-Factor comparison for SW-EOS for Nitrogen.

PT-EOS) 1. P (Psia) Figure D.46 Z-Factor 1.15: Z-Factor comparison for PT-EOS for Carbon dioxide. PT-EOS) 1.33 0.03 0. T=560 1.23 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure.43 Expt. vs. T=920 0. T=680 Expt.63 PT-EOS 680 R 0.16 PT-EOS 680 R PT-EOS 920 R Expt.53 PT-EOS 920 R Expt.Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Exp.96 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure. T=920 0.73 PT-EOS 560 R 0. T=560 0. T=680 Expt.13 1.93 Z-Factor 0.36 1.06 Expt.26 PT-EOS 560 R 1.16: Z-Factor comparison for PT-EOS for Nitrogen. vs. P (Psia) Figure D.83 0. 134 9000 . Z-Factor Comparison Graph (Expt.

18: Z-Factor comparison for TB-EOS for Carbon dioxide.5 T=220 F 100 F EXP 0.95 220 F 460 F 100 F EXP 0.85 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0.15 1.8 0.9 Z-Factor 0.4 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 0.35 1.25 Z-Factor 1.1 TB-EOS (CO2) 1 0. 1. 135 10000 .2 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 P(psia) Figure D.75 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Pressure (psia) Figure D.7 0.05 100 F 0.17: Z-Factor comparison for TB-EOS for Methane.TB-EOS (METHANE) 1.3 0.6 T=100 F T=160 F 0.

2 1.1. 136 10000 .4 100 F 220 F 460 F 1.3 100 F EXP Z-Factor 220 F EXP 460 F EXP 1.5 TB-EOS (NITROGEN) 1.9 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure (psia) Figure D.1 1 0.19: Z-Factor comparison for TB-EOS for Nitrogen.

0 0 0.4 6 75.0 0 o 600 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.1: UCalgary Z-Factor Data.61 0.0 2 0.847 1000 0.731 2500 0.586 2500 0.732 5000 0.APPENDIX E EXPERIMENTAL Z-FACTOR FOR MISCELLANEOUS GASES Table E.61 0.895 1000 0.836 1500 0.0 8 0.0 2 0.7 1 0.876 nC CO nC 137 .713 3000 0.722 4000 0. Thesi s Mcle odMix-1 Thesi s Mcle odMix-1 CO nC nC T ( F) Cmp nt.60 0.0 2 0.0 0 0.779 2000 0.7 1 0.5 0 22.632 4000 0. o 600 0.0 0 0.0 8 0. 2 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 4 iC5 5 6 C7 + 40 P (psia) Mole % Zexpt .0 0 0.595 3000 0.0 0 0.5 0 22.639 2000 0.783 5000 0.60 0.4 6 75.845 T ( F) Com pone nt 100 P (psia) Mole % Zexpt . 0.0 0 nC nC 2 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 4 iC5 5 6 C7 + 0.748 1500 0.

71 0.9 1500 0.00 0.722 4000 0.46 75.865 2000 0. H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 22.59 0.00 600 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 22.02 0.632 4000 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.887 T (oF) Mcleod-Mix-2 65 0.706 2021 0.82 1022 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 14.46 75.847 1000 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 P (psia) Zexpt.69 4021 0.08 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 14. 626 0. 600 0.586 2500 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.779 2000 0.783 5000 0.781 5021 0.825 4000 0.02 0.50 Component CO2 P (psia) Thesis 0.30 138 .00 0.03 0.50 22.639 2000 0.02 0. CO2 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 40 Mole % 0.876 T (oF) Component CO2 175 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.59 0.02 0.731 2500 0.08 0.14 0.60 0.) Thesis Mcleod-Mix-1 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-1 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-1 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-2 T (oF) Cmpnt.00 0.895 1000 0.30 Component CO2 Mole % 0.00 0.1 (Contd.836 1500 0.914 T (oF) 40 Mole % Zexpt.02 0.02 0.713 3000 0.748 1500 0.Table E.00 0.71 0.61 0.826 3000 0.00 0.787 1521 0.595 3000 0.02 0.46 75.08 0. 600 0.662 2521 0.61 0.14 0.71 0.845 T (oF) Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.50 0.839 2500 0.03 0.663 3021 0.02 0.00 0.38 0.46 84.866 848 0.46 84.38 0.856 5000 0.732 5000 0.61 0.933 1000 0.00 0.

876 5021 0.08 0. Mcleod-Mix-2 0.30 14.894 1522 0.38 0.59 0.858 2021 0.869 4021 0.59 0.867 3021 0.03 0.59 0.826 3021 0.38 0.46 0.859 1022 0.46 84.911 1023 0.14 0.763 2021 0.828 1521 0.00 0.722 2522 0.874 2521 0.909 824 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.873 5021 0.837 4521 0.903 T (oF) 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.93 1023 0.716 3022 0.911 625 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 14.30 Component CO2 P (psia) 655 Thesis Component CO2 0.941 Component CO2 175 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.864 1522 0.807 5022 0.03 0.903 5021 0.946 823 0.958 139 84.781 3521 0.919 T (oF) 135 Mole % Zexpt.08 0.08 0.805 4021 0.891 2021 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.732 4022 0.00 0. 565 0.918 1522 0.00 .886 1023 0.) Thesis Mcleod-Mix-2 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-2 P (psia) Zexpt.02 0.38 0.83 4021 0.773 3021 0.926 824 T (oF) 0.02 0. 607 0.00 0.14 0. 624 0.783 2521 0.00 0.00 0.889 823 0.Table E.46 84.1 (Contd.30 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 14.00 0.815 2021 0.834 2521 0.14 0.00 0.

00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 nC5 nC6 C7+ 6.31 Component CO2 175 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0. 600 0.1 (Contd.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.08 0.51 C1 84.82 .02 0.00 iC5 0.08 0.) Thesis Mcleod-Mix-3 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-3 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-3 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-3 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-22 T (oF) Component CO2 40 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt. 500 91.902 140 91.02 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.945 1.00 0.81 0.91 0.808 3000 0.08 0.02 0. 600 0.00 0.70 0.02 0.932 5000 0. 600 0.945 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.51 C1 91.918 T (oF) Component CO2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.808 3000 0.84 0.815 4000 0.80 5.843 2000 0.10 Zexpt.31 H2S 1.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.70 H2S 0.51 0.951 1000 0.986 1.707 3000 0.00 0.00 0.00 Component CO2 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.929 1500 0.896 2500 0.892 3000 0.913 1000 0.00 0.67 1.883 1500 0.99 0.843 2000 0.52 N2 0.867 5000 0.815 4000 0.84 0.51 C2 C1 Mole % T (oF) 0.02 0.00 iC5 0.70 H2S 5.08 0.02 iC5 0.Table E.52 91.816 2500 0.64 2.84 0.816 2500 0. 600 0.31 Component CO2 88 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.70 N2 H2S P (psia) T (oF) 1.73 4000 0.867 5000 0.84 0.909 2000 0.00 0.52 N2 0.892 1000 0.52 C1 N2 100 T (oF) 5.913 1000 0.00 0.814 5000 0.02 0.751 2000 0.819 1500 0.711 2500 0.19 0.897 4000 0.31 5.883 1500 0.

862 1500 0.877 T (oF) 1.853 3500 0.) Thesis Mcleod-Mix-22 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-22 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-24 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-24 Thesis 1000 0.85 1.765 3500 0.66 1.925 1000 0.64 2.96 1000 0.756 2000 0.07 0.742 2500 0.91 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.00 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.32 0.61 Component CO2 152 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.777 2000 0.29 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 0.Table E.00 H2S N2 0.91 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.947 1000 0.811 2000 0.802 0.99 C1 85.728 3000 0. 500 0.91 T (oF) 81 Mole % Zexpt.19 0.32 0.843 3000 0.903 1500 0.9 2000 0.67 1.80 0.09 0.842 1500 0. 500 0.848 2500 0.918 1000 0.797 3500 0.927 1500 0.823 1500 0.57 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.884 2500 0.82 iC5 0.66 1.772 3000 0.00 0.891 3500 0.787 T (oF) Component CO2 113 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.82 iC5 0.00 H2S 0.64 2.61 Component CO2 H2S 0.755 3500 0.99 C1 84.85 1.00 N2 0.81 N2 0.725 2500 0.868 2000 0.62 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 C1 85.1 (Contd.00 3.19 0.81 N2 0.62 nC5 nC6 C7+ .07 0.57 iC5 0.67 1.739 3000 0.775 2500 0.09 0.80 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 1.821 T (oF) Component CO2 200 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 H2S 0. 500 0.00 3.10 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.10 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 H2S 0. 500 0.00 0.882 3000 0.00 N2 141 C1 84.29 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.

90 1.62 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.889 3500 0.924 4000 0.32 C1 90.916 T (oF) Component CO2 91 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.00 0.895 150 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.939 1000 0.08 0.32 C1 94.66 1.955 5000 1.00 C1 94.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 500 0.90 1.13 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.00 0.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.00 C1 90.61 H2S 0.971 0.00 0.953 1500 0.925 Reservoir T (oF) S & B T4 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.32 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.00 C1 90.929 1000 0.00 0.00 iC5 0.40 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 0.00 iC5 0.13 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3.00 H2S H2S 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.958 1000 0.00 H2S 0.96 1000 0.89 3000 0.17 0.00 10.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 iC5 0.929 1500 0.00 Component CO2 1000 T (oF) 0.32 C1 94. 500 0.906 2000 0.17 0.00 0.00 0. 500 0.57 iC5 0.1 (Contd.) Mcleod-Mix-24 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-25 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-25 Thesis Mcleod-Mix-25 200 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.00 .85 1.00 0.00 0.09 0. 600 0.00 iC5 0.00 142 85.00 N2 0.00 Component CO2 Mole % 0.00 iC5 0.899 2000 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.969 Reservoir T (oF) S & B T4 220 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.874 4000 0.13 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3.875 T (oF) 110 Mole % Zexpt.29 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3. 500 0.Table E.911 5000 0.929 1500 0.892 2500 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.08 0.00 10.17 0.00 0.08 0.00 N2 0.955 0.937 2000 0.00 H2S 0.00 6.40 Component CO2 P (psia) Reservoir 0.002 280 H2S 0.00 N2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N2 0.926 3000 0. 600 0.00 0.00 N2 0.00 0.00 N2 0.00 0.90 1.40 Component CO2 1000 S & B T4 0.879 3000 0.00 10.

00 C1 80.00 0.00 0.00 0.963 1000 0.7500 143 nC5 0 .57 125 SgC7+ 0.46 2.90 2.981 1000 0.937 3000 0.80 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.842 3000 0.80 N2 0.00 iC5 0.909 1500 0.00 0.00 0.00 C1 80.00 Component CO2 1000 H2S 0.) P (psia) Zexpt.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 5.00 0.863 5000 0.00 N2 0.925 Reservoir T (oF) S & B T4 220 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.829 MC7+ 2347 0.96 4000 0.825 4000 0.00 0.7500 T (oF) Component CO2 189 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 iC5 0.18 125 iC5 0.85 2115 0.953 5000 0.00 0.899 3000 0.931 4000 0.57 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.00 N2 0.941 1500 0.87 2000 0.00 iC5 0.00 C1 68.957 3000 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0. Component CO2 600 0.945 1000 0.47 1.948 2000 0.887 4000 0.99 T (oF) 157 Mole % Zexpt.16 10.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.16 iC5 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.21 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 20.78 N2 0. 4915 0.00 0.00 0.00 Component CO2 P (psia) H2S 0.00 20.938 5065 0.Table E.61 MC7+ nC6 C7+ 0.027 Reservoir T (oF) S & B T4 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.989 5000 1.823 SgC7+ 0.35 0.14 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3. Component CO2 600 0.959 Reservoir T (oF) S & B T4 280 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.976 0.963 2000 0.27 1.00 0.972 1500 0.00 0.09 H2S 6.00 0.00 2. Reservoir Mix-2-API-PRJ37 Reservoir Mix-17-API-PRJ37 600 0.82 0.95 H2S 6.917 2000 0.00 20.19 C1 80.963 1500 0.00 0.912 5000 0.00 N2 10.00 0. 600 0.22 0.4 C1 74.1 (Contd. H2S 0.

Table E.91 3.84 0.77 C2 C3 iC4 2.27 0.934 4200 0.17 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.13 6.38 0.43 125 SgC7+ 0.43 1.27 0.83 iC5 0.903 3270 0.97 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.5 iC4 nC4 0.72 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.7500 Component CO2 P (psia) 10.70 C1 MC7+ Component CO2 P (psia) 2.42 2.00 1. 4000 0.959 4915 0.90 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.15 7.955 4815 0.26 N2 0.942 SgC7+ 0.5 N2 2.7500 T (oF) Component CO2 230 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.98 C1 70.83 C3 2.006 T (oF) 276 Mole % Zexpt.875 5000 0.955 nC4 0.00 2.06 H2S 125 3.91 3400 0.887 SgC7+ 0.884 MC7+ 4515 0.42 0.48 125 4475 0. 4720 0.1 (Contd.13 11.7500 4.56 1.981 5130 1.7500 4565 0.95 4515 0.72 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.39 0.6 MC7+ iC5 0.10 MC7+ iC5 2.946 4400 0.13 C1 0 78.7500 Reservoir Mix-2-API-PRJ37 Reservoir Mix-402-APIPRJ-37 Reservoir Mix-601-APIPRJ-37 Reservoir Mix-705-APIPRJ-37 Reservoir Mix-707-APIPRJ-37 T (oF) Component CO2 216 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.925 4000 0.03 4.852 MC7+ 5385 0.24 H2S 2.918 3800 0.22 C2 4.00 1. 3000 0.18 C1 56.00 0.95 4774 0.18 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.37 1.53 N2 15.16 H2S N2 9.914 3600 0.12 5.65 C3 iC4 nC4 1.97 4800 0.014 5515 1.58 C1 41.43 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.66 18.67 iC5 0.37 C1 C2 52.64 125 H2S 4.7500 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 2.23 3.) Reservoir Mix-25-API-PRJ37 T (oF) Component CO2 191 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.969 5015 0.17 H2S 18.991 5315 1.954 4600 0.90 N2 0.981 5115 0.893 144 0 .97 1. H2S 8.039 T (oF) 6.40 MC7+ iC5 1.34 2.98 190 Mole % Zexpt.66 1.85 125 SgC7+ 0.59 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.948 4743 0.31 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0. 4945 4.82 0 125 SgC7+ 0.44 N2 SgC7+ 0.49 iC5 1.61 218 Mole % Zexpt. 70.52 0.68 8.

7500 2515 0.31 1.35 1.844 3515 0.71 C1 65.15 C1 70.56 N2 4.00 0.7500 3215 0.05 H2S 2.59 125 4430 0.78 2.06 H2S 6.12 0.Table E.00 0.39 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.7500 4715 1.951 T (oF) Component CO2 143 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.18 3.906 4415 0.7500 3215 0.006 6015 1.8 iC4 nC4 0. 5.91 4915 0.3 0.943 5015 0.872 3586 0.30 13.812 MC7+ 3115 0.49 3.994 SgC7+ 0.834 3815 0.987 MC7+ 4515 0.05 N2 25.831 MC7+ 0.35 C2 C3 iC4 6.01 3025 0.77 0.57 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3.45 iC5 0.42 0.903 4515 0.861 3515 0.15 C1 49.95 iC5 0.77 0.899 4715 0.831 SgC7+ 0. H2S 2.933 5215 0.859 SgC7+ 0.927 4715 0.859 MC7+ 0.067 T (oF) Component CO2 179 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 iC5 1.968 206 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.62 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.011 145 0.868 4015 0.52 C2 5.37 0.11 H2S 6.1 (Contd.832 2615 0.07 1.818 3315 0.875 4115 0.64 2399 0.916 5015 0.834 3015 0.946 5015 0.7 iC5 1.814 SgC7+ 0.21 N2 8.21 N2 10.824 3515 0.23 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0 0.05 nC4 1.) 4615 Reservoir Mix-722-APIPRJ-37 Reservoir Mix-727-APIPRJ-37 Reservoir Mix-729-APIPRJ-37 Reservoir Mix-735-APIPRJ-37 0.52 C1 77.986 Component CO2 181 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.38 C3 2.853 4215 0.85 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 2. 5.50 0.22 1.97 5515 1.883 4615 0.17 125 3099 Component CO2 C7+ 125 3115 T (oF) nC6 125 2415 T (oF) nC5 0 . 2.

24 0.485 SgC7+ 0.07 0.24 0.083 T (oF) Component CO2 73 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.7500 3014 0.01 0.01 0.693 5014 0.402 MC7+ 0.03 iC5 0.24 0.58 C1 42.02 0.526 3514 0.02 0.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir 4915 1.728 T (oF) Component CO2 84 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.07 0.58 C1 42.) Reservoir Shell-Et.03 iC5 0.37 N2 2.37 N2 2.01 0.677 5014 0.03 iC5 0.02 0. H2S 3.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir Shell-Et.07 0.734 T (oF) Component CO2 95 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.02 0. H2S 3.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.1 (Contd.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.07 0.02 0.056 5515 1.586 4014 0.02 0.685 5014 0.02 0.7500 3014 0.37 N2 2.562 0.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.612 0.03 iC5 0.19 51.67 5014 0.02 0.58 C1 42.578 4014 0.534 3514 0. H2S 3.737 Component CO2 110 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.24 0.639 4514 0.507 3514 0.438 SgC7+ 0.553 4014 0.458 MC7+ 0.02 0.495 MC7+ 0.7500 3014 0.029 5215 1.495 3514 0.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.02 0.7500 3014 0.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.19 51.426 MC7+ 0. H2S 3.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir Shell-Et.01 120 2114 2514 T (oF) C7+ 120 2114 2514 4014 nC6 120 2114 2514 4514 nC5 iC5 .62 4514 0.19 51.19 51.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 120 2114 2514 T (oF) 0.Table E.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir Shell-Et.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.478 SgC7+ 0.747 Component CO2 H2S N2 146 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.02 0.454 SgC7+ 0.02 0.37 N2 2.632 4514 0.58 C1 42.

Table E.37 0.755 5014 0.58 SgC7+ 0.893 4000 0.37 H2S 8.32 N2 1.41 0.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir Shell-Et.19 51.99 0.58 C1 42.918 4500 0. 42.75 C2 C3 iC4 3.662 4514 0.02 H2S 3.02 0.2 H2S 3.749 0.66 N2 1.722 0.01 SgC7+ 0.69 2514 0.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.665 3014 0.04 147 C1 52.02 N2 2.01 0.666 4014 0.45 2.73 4514 0.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir 147-Sutte-Plant Reservoir 147-Waterton 147 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.869 3000 0.19 51.AlMarmattan-1033 Reservoir Shell-Et.02 120 2514 3014 0.57 125 200 500 T (oF) nC5 120 0.585 3514 0.651 3514 0.15 nC4 0.03 29.711 0.7500 Component CO2 P (psia) 2.786 T (oF) Component CO2 198 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.61 2514 0.24 0.619 4014 0.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.71 4014 0.02 0.82 0.22 .07 0. 4.74 2. nC6 C7+ 0.731 5014 0.707 5014 0.7500 0.951 5000 0.968 SgC7+ 0.) Shell-Et.07 0.06 C1 77.37 N2 2.16 0.988 Component CO2 156 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.568 3014 0.11 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.58 C1 42.7340 1000 0.48 0.03 iC5 0.45 iC5 0.1 (Contd. 2114 0.03 MC7+ H2S 3.876 3500 0.19 51.23 0.07 0.03 MC7+ iC5 0.756 T (oF) 186 Mole % Zexpt.25 0.924 1500 0.04 120 2114 3514 0.23 0.6 iC5 0.24 0.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.991 MC7+ 0.91 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.02 0.696 4514 0.24 0.77 230 Mole % Zexpt.878 2500 0.895 2000 0.7500 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 3. 2114 0.02 MC7+ SgC7+ 0.58 1.

03 iC5 0.66 C1 44.AL-68(L) Reservoir HOME-ET.749 MC7+ 4014 0.938 MC7+ 4615 0.08 49.562 4014 0.75 1514 0.23 0.66 C1 44.18 H2S 7.7500 Component CO2 P (psia) H2S C7+ 0.Table E.622 2014 0.03 0.557 3514 0.667 MC7+ 0.06 0.74 T (oF) 3.47 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.02 0.01 0.47 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.537 2514 0.966 5015 0. N2 2.35 N2 2.60 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.01 0.06 0.948 SgC7+ 0.02 0.82 4914 0.757 SgC7+ 0.691 5014 0.1 (Contd.23 0.02 0.032 6015 1.597 4014 0.81 C1 70.09 130 iC5 0.57 131 1514 T (oF) nC5 H2S 3.08 49.35 N2 2.66 148 C1 44.57 1.003 5515 1. H2S 3.23 0.457 3014 0.421 2514 0.04 N2 4.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0. 3.73 120 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.061 T (oF) Component CO2 77 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.674 5014 0.83 2.774 4414 0.03 MC7+ 4.03 0.) Reservoir Gold Creek Reservoir HOME-ET.AL-68(L) Reservoir HOME-ET.69 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3.984 5215 1.02 0.408 3514 0.917 6014 0.7850 4815 0.04 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.948 T (oF) Component CO2 210 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.455 SgC7+ 0.03 iC5 0.08 49.06 0.02 0.01 0.93 125 1014 Component CO2 nC6 0.47 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.35 144 Mole % Zexpt.60 4496 0.03 0.839 5064 0.04 125 SgC7+ 0.02 .618 4514 0.09 0.853 5114 0.AL-68(L) 3914 0.868 5414 0.858 5214 0.7500 2014 0.888 5714 0.529 3014 0. 1014 0.643 4514 0.8340 4214 0.792 4714 0.

752 T (oF) Component CO2 230 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.32 C1 C2 78.54 0.03 iC5 0.757 4514 0. 3.809 T (oF) Component CO2 93 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.62 H2S 1.30 C3 iC4 nC4 3.47 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.29 C3 iC4 nC4 3.27 iC5 0.02 0.739 3514 0.29 .27 iC5 0.861 915 0.23 Component CO2 Mole % 1.AL-68(L) Reservoir DICK-LAKE-A15(SMOOTHEDDATA) Reservoir DICK-LAKE-A15(SMOOTHEDDATA) Reservoir DICK-LAKE-A15(SMOOTHEDDATA) Reservoir RIMBEY-GASPLANT 1014 0.52 N2 2.868 915 0.849 T (oF) 105 Mole % Zexpt. 615 0.858 T (oF) 1.87 T (oF) 1.94 0.30 C3 iC4 nC4 4.66 C1 44.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.878 815 0.52 N2 2.62 1.27 iC5 0.23 Component CO2 P (psia) 84 H2S 125 1.03 0.872 815 0.Table E.52 N2 2.62 H2S 1.23 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.832 SgC7+ 0.78 5014 0.08 49.54 1.48 10.74 4014 0.596 3514 0.888 815 0.54 0.879 915 0.54 1. 615 0.896 715 0.884 MC7+ 1514 0.626 4014 0.24 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.21 H2S 1.06 0.02 1014 0.14 10.48 10.30 C3 iC4 nC4 3.29 0.30 0.23 0.751 3014 0.00 125 iC5 0.35 N2 2.32 C1 C2 77.802 MC7+ 1514 0.882 715 0.05 0.23 Component CO2 120 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.54 0.7500 2014 0.7500 2014 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.94 0.612 2514 0.) Reservoir HOME-ET.24 0. 615 0.08 149 C1 C2 77.665 4514 0.01 0.786 2514 0.584 3014 0.50 N2 2.24 0.32 C1 C2 77.62 H2S 1.48 10.04 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.54 1.1 (Contd.707 5014 0.692 SgC7+ 0.94 0.888 715 0.

21 0.52 1.56 3.853 1015 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.869 T (oF) 1. 750 T (oF) 1.865 1015 0.75 N2 2.99 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.21 0.878 1015 0.92 0.887 915 0.34 0.50 0.75 N2 2.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.61 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 2.34 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.872 815 0.52 C1 80. 615 0.842 1500 0.844 100 Mole % Zexpt.61 Component CO2 120 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.926 750 0.883 815 0.35 0.92 0.26 H2S N2 2.92 0.52 C1 iC5 0.61 2.892 715 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.52 C1 80.61 2.21 iC5 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.) DICK-LAKE-A15(SMOOTHEDDATA) P (psia) 500 Reservoir RIMBEY-GASPLANT DICK-LAKE-A23(SMOOTHEDDATA) Reservoir Reservoir HOMEGLENRIMBEY-A25(SMOOTHEDDATA) Reservoir HOMEGLENRIMBEY-A25(SMOOTHEDDATA) Reservoir 0.75 N2 150 C1 80.29 N2 Zexpt. 0.816 Component CO2 83 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.856 1.21 iC5 .905 715 0.896 815 0.945 1000 T (oF) 3.911 0.805 1400 0.99 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.873 1250 0.1 (Contd.86 H2S 1.02 0.42 0.99 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 0.50 0.874 915 0.862 915 0.50 0.26 H2S 3.61 2.26 H2S 3.61 Component CO2 H2S 3.841 1250 0.28 C1 80.Table E.07 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 6.37 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0. 615 0.885 1000 0.881 715 0.21 0.42 0. 615 0.787 T (oF) 95 Component CO2 Mole % P (psia) 500 HOMEGLENRIMBEY-A25(SMOOTHEDDATA) Zexpt.42 0.21 iC5 0.

044 6514 1.902 5014 0.42 N2 0.74 0.874 4714 0.906 1733 0.881 4814 0.915 4014 0.51 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.19 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.07 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3.07 0.78 H2S 6.93 1.2-23 Reservoir 156 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.868 SgC7+ 0.051 T (oF) Component CO2 120 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.95 5014 0.5-17 Reservoir SHELL-NO.10 936 0.9050 4650 0.1 (Contd.32 0. 3.34 iC5 0.886 4346 0.92 0.03 Component CO2 196 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.882 MC7+ 0.) SHELL-LOWWATERTONNO.49 C1 81.64 0.914 3851 0.886 2772 0.4W.40 N2 0.97 65.3BURNTTIMBER Reservoir SHELL-NO.893 4514 0.883 SgC7+ 0.864 MC7+ 4596 0.094 Component CO2 H2S N2 151 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 5.948 5514 0.923 4514 0.901 3781 0.52 0.8050 4314 0.23 1.94 0.87 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 3.7580 1203 0.74 0.13 0.899 1912 0.892 4914 0.12 0.887 4414 0.49 3.912 3827 0.P.885 3199 0.981 5514 1.J.885 4330 0.53 0.22 0.12 140 4560 T (oF) 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 118 4295 T (oF) 1.893 3506 0. 6.Table E.915 1557 0.03 0.48 16.935 MC7+ 1058 0.995 6014 1.903 5114 0.33 C1 81.32 0.18 4279 0.50 127 iC5 .17 H2S 5.929 SgC7+ 0. 5.894 2275 0.923 1363 0.973 6014 1.19 iC5 0.926 5514 0.014 6014 1.

958 5514 1.926 3014 0.12 C1 60.975 MC7+ 1014 0.Table E.17 125 514 0.88 2514 0.07 0.846 4014 0.34 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.7500 1514 0.943 4014 0.11 1.823 3014 0. 3542 0.06 12.96 9.04 0.18 0.6-11(UPPER) Reservoir ROYALITEEDSON-6-4-5217 Reservoir ROYALITEEDSON-6-4-5217 Reservoir HB-UNIONKAYBOS-S-714 162 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.45 H2S 3.00 1.70 0.44 MC7+ iC5 0.831 3314 0.33 0. 4.918 T (oF) Component CO2 220 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.7610 2945 0.896 4014 0.09 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.955 SgC7+ 0. 2.825 3114 0. 4.) WIMBORNENO.12 1.80 0.16 0.70 0.898 0.009 5014 1.63 1.34 3.821 2984 0.916 5014 0.939 2014 0.971 4514 1.827 3214 0.09 0.7940 152 .66 0.17 90.34 0.13 16.42 514 0.051 1.873 3014 0.961 T (oF) Component CO2 250 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.34 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.31 2.09 0.003 6014 1.82 MC7+ 2916 0.82 N2 1.959 MC7+ 0.878 4514 0.16 0.878 3514 0.823 3064 0.925 SgC7+ 0.931 3514 0.1 (Contd.82 SgC7+ 0.94 4014 0.11 0.17 125 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.10 3.63 66.31 2.929 2514 0.17 90.66 0.7500 1514 0.94 0.48 H2S 1014 2014 0.72 3.18 0.048 Component CO2 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.04 0.836 3514 0.56 115 2899 T (oF) 0.41 124 SgC7+ 0.11 0.07 0.

01 C1 0.00 0.27 N2 0.56 iC5 0. T (oF) Component CO2 50 Mole % Zexpt.12 15.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.00 0.99 N2 nC6 0.952 536 0.821 T (oF) H2S 12.864 1556 0.778 Component CO2 200 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.1 (Contd.851 P (psia) T (oF) H2S nC5 125 0.915 1623 0.37 Component CO2 50 T (oF) 1.956 776 0.967 369 0.00 0.00 0.033 6514 1.07 0.09 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.35 C1 46.848 764 Reservoir 3.28 N2 3.00 0.821 246 Reservoir 1.62 N2 3457 464 Reservoir PANTHERRIVER-5-23 H2S 4014 434 Reservoir PANTHERRIVER-5-23 Component CO2 7.00 iC5 .73 0.11 4.144 T (oF) 230 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt. 252 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.) Reservoir HB-UNIONKAYBOS-S-111 Reservoir PANTHERRIVER-5-23 5514 1.30 iC5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0. 49.18 20.936 5514 0.67 MC7+ SgC7+ 0. R&J-Mixture-17 R&J-Mixture-18 Reservoir 60.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.44 Component CO2 H2S 7.00 N2 2.03 C1 iC5 0.00 0.Table E.29 0.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.80 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.00 0.12 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.82 1.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.902 1101 0.98 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.53 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.29 0.00 0.97 532 0.984 6014 1.06 0.28 0.938 1125 0.85 3.75 1.85 P (psia) T (oF) 12.00 0.096 6014 1.09 C1 55.00 0.35 H2S N2 0. Mole % Zexpt.77 30.082 T (oF) Component CO2 50 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.979 363 0. H2S 1.61 N2 153 C1 83.931 772 0.00 0.00 0.89 5014 0.7950 4514 0.00 H2S 10.23 C1 76.30 0.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.86 35.846 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.01 38.54 C1 C7+ 0.

854 T (oF) Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt. 400 0.27 N2 3.927 1559 0.00 0.22 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.54 0. H2S 2.50 N2 0. 15.903 T (oF) 2.00 iC5 0.964 538 0.85 1.962 344 0.00 iC5 0.04 N2 0.00 .863 1188 0.874 T (oF) Component CO2 120 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.10 400 0.55 14.842 1000 0.45 0.85 1.10 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.869 T (oF) 22.93 C1 89.00 0.82 1000 0.05 0.27 Component CO2 P (psia) 28.28 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.08 H2S 0.00 0. 233 0.20 3.00 0. 231 0.20 3.00 0.00 iC5 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.07 0.959 H2S 0.28 0.00 0.812 1640 0.00 0.00 iC5 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 194 0.00 0.04 C1 56.01 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 8.91 0.40 0.59 C1 69.26 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 8.11 0.14 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 H2S 4.00 0.87 23.00 H2S 0.974 505 0.963 739 0.00 0.Table E.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.867 SgC7+ 800 0.972 339 0.1 (Contd.975 360 0.) R&J-Mixture-19 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-20 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-20 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-11 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-12 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-13 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.45 0.82 N2 0.902 T (oF) 150 Mole % Zexpt.947 1076 0.968 MC7+ 285 0.927 1130 0.01 C1 75.96 154 C1 56.41 67.912 MC7+ 600 0.22 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.949 783 0.903 849 0.883 800 0.92 1.87 23.9 1622 0.953 SgC7+ 414 0.71 0.09 N2 3.30 Component CO2 200 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.21 0.932 597 0.922 600 0.00 0.00 iC5 0.71 0.06 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.00 0. 250 0.

44 16. 352 0. 255 0.30 Component CO2 P (psia) 197 Reservoir 0.00 0.884 1617 0.808 100 Mole % Zexpt.945 547 0.00 0.964 515 0.Table E.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.883 1464 0.) 495 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-14 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-15 717 0.10 26.00 0.53 0.916 1029 0.798 T (oF) 100 Mole % Zexpt.53 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.48 0.32 0.845 T (oF) R&J-Mixture-16 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-5 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-6 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.33 Component CO2 P (psia) H2S 1.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.06 C1 97.48 C1 68.926 H2S 10.68 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.00 N2 0.00 0.66 N2 0.00 0.00 iC5 0.846 100 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.965 363 0.00 iC5 0.15 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 9.00 0.00 iC5 0.959 547 0.1 (Contd.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.18 10.26 C1 49.00 iC5 0.965 288 T (oF) H2S 1.48 iC5 0.00 0.941 791 0.04 H2S 0.00 .77 N2 10. 0.894 848 0.39 0.00 0.927 600 0.851 1178 0.22 0.926 754 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.921 785 0.95 418 0.95 155 C1 77.99 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 2.43 0.00 0.916 1135 0. 258 0.55 10.68 C1 79.972 375 0.854 1511 0.794 1609 0.829 150 Mole % Zexpt.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.948 749 0.00 0.27 18.949 526 0.00 0.847 1558 0.941 0.889 1111 0.00 0.96 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) H2S N2 0.962 377 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0. 248 0.77 N2 0.00 0.895 1074 0.

967 371 0. 1026 0.00 0.68 N2 0.907 672 0.877 1614 0.935 473 0.00 iC5 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1. 254 0.46 0. 256 0.49 0.937 792 0.816 2526 0.53 156 C1 92.956 328 0.77 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.822 5.22 C1 86.60 C1 89.39 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.84 T (oF) 100 Mole % Zexpt.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.911 1134 0.00 iC5 0.55 N2 0.97 225 0.04 0.00 0.1 (Contd.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.Table E.46 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 5.00 iC5 0. 154 0.00 .46 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.00 0.952 540 0.844 2026 0.00 0.822 19.09 0.843 1703 0.00 H2S 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.924 1049 0.36 54.) Reservoir R&J-Mixture-7 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-8 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-9 Reservoir R&J-Mixture-10 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-1 1000 0.867 T (oF) Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.902 1111 0.00 N2 0.30 C1 44.26 N2 0.865 1570 0.946 726 0.00 H2S 0.16 C1 78.04 0.00 iC5 0.894 1496 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.956 548 0.86 T (oF) Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.68 0. 342 0.00 0.00 0.00 H2S 0.84 N2 0.00 0.866 937 0.64 0.00 iC5 0.00 0.811 1275 0.00 0.963 500 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 H2S 0.72 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.898 1550 0.00 0.97 376 0.931 779 0.867 T (oF) 11.861 1526 0.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.811 3026 0.00 0.06 H2S 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 1.

974 6026 1.00 0.96 5026 1.143 T (oF) 5.064 7026 1.00 H2S 0.881 1526 0.877 4026 0.) Reservoir B&C-Mixture-1 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-1 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-2 Reservoir 3526 0.904 4526 0.00 H2S 0.00 0. 1026 0.05 7026 1.00 0.06 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.959 6026 1.00 0.095 7026 1.19 T (oF) 5.904 1526 0.13 Component CO2 H2S 0.77 C1 89.855 2526 0.146 T (oF) Component CO2 130 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.917 5026 0.00 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.878 4526 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.00 0.874 3026 0.846 4026 0.Table E.056 7026 1.812 2526 0.00 0.851 3026 0.937 5026 0.143 T (oF) Component CO2 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.875 3526 0.00 0.00 iC5 0.53 N2 0.00 iC5 0.10 0.002 6026 1.954 5026 1.00 H2S N2 0.923 4526 0.00 0.885 2526 0.875 2026 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.77 C1 85. 1026 0. 1026 0.57 N2 157 C1 89.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 0.64 0.838 2026 0.64 0.905 3526 0.06 10.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.00 0.009 6026 1.1 (Contd.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ .899 2026 0.857 3526 0.864 3026 0.00 0.00 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.901 4026 0.925 1526 0.908 4026 0.53 N2 0.20 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.921 4526 0.

52 158 85.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.877 3026 0.938 4526 0.925 2526 0.00 0.00 0. 1026 0.93 5026 0.844 3026 0.851 3526 0.889 1526 0.00 H2S 0.904 4026 0. 1026 0.13 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 iC5 0.85 2526 0.57 N2 0.13 20.00 iC5 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.872 2026 0.139 T (oF) 10.969 6026 1.214 T (oF) 10.00 0.1 (Contd.852 2026 0.904 1526 0.899 4026 0.882 2526 0.883 3526 0.114 7026 1.00 0.865 1526 0. 1026 0.879 4026 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.862 3026 0.899 2026 0.74 0. 1026 0.814 2026 0.923 6026 1.00 0.923 1526 0.00 0.00 0.00 H2S 0.58 C1 74.00 0.20 C1 74.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.979 5026 0.20 C1 85.897 4526 0.00 .00 0.Table E.878 2526 0.00 0.00 0.58 4.949 5026 0.139 T (oF) Component CO2 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.16 0.058 7026 1.92 20.) B&C-Mixture-2 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-2 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-3 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-3 130 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.878 3526 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.00 H2S 0.00 0.052 7026 1.74 0.16 Component CO2 130 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.914 3026 0.52 N2 0.00 iC5 0.10 0.983 6026 1.57 N2 0.00 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.921 4526 0.

993 4526 1.241 Component CO2 130 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 iC5 0.906 4026 0.056 6026 1.821 4526 0.951 1526 0.035 7026 1.00 C2 iC4 nC4 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.878 3526 0.989 5026 1.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.16 Component CO2 P (psia) 1026 Reservoir Component CO2 10.131 7026 1.91 1526 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.87 2526 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.00 0.939 4026 0.863 3026 0.00 C2 iC4 nC4 iC5 0.00 H2S N2 0.814 3026 0.74 0.955 3526 0. 1026 0.967 4526 1.00 H2S 0.913 1526 T (oF) 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.814 2526 0.Table E.00 0.91 H2S 0.875 4026 0.00 0.036 6026 1.00 N2 159 C1 75.882 2026 0.58 C1 75.00 N2 0.86 2526 0.024 5026 1.00 0.52 N2 0.215 T (oF) 100 Mole % Zexpt.126 7026 1.00 iC5 .00 0.93 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.00 13.945 4526 0.) Reservoir B&C-Mixture-3 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-4 3526 0.00 13.041 6026 1.00 0.97 4026 0.00 C1 74.1 (Contd.91 Component CO2 H2S 0.93 C1 C3 C3 iC5 0.023 6026 1.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.837 3526 0.134 7026 1.136 T (oF) 10.214 T (oF) 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.971 5026 1.899 2026 0.85 2026 0.16 0. 1026 0. B&C-Mixture-4 Reservoir 0.002 5026 1.95 3026 0.

851 4026 0.93 C1 0.904 3026 0.16 0.00 0.41 28.00 iC5 0.00 N2 0.778 3026 0.138 T (oF) 12.882 4026 0.92 0.231 T (oF) 10.00 0.125 7026 1.00 0.91 2526 0. 1026 0.00 0.00 0.00 N2 0.875 3026 0.00 iC5 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.021 6026 1.00 0.00 0.00 160 75.83 3026 0.1 (Contd.93 1526 0.00 58. 1026 0.01 6026 1.00 0.00 0.045 6026 1.848 3526 0.124 7026 1.00 0.00 H2S 0.872 2026 0. 1026 0.228 T (oF) Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.893 1526 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.936 4026 0.955 5026 1.92 Component CO2 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.41 28.00 0.00 0.00 iC5 0.961 1526 0.934 2026 0.971 5026 1.913 2026 0.967 4526 1. 1026 0.974 1526 0.901 4526 0.00 0.883 2526 0.Table E.00 H2S 0.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.886 12.808 3526 0.776 2526 0.67 C1 C2 58.00 13.003 5026 1.00 0.00 C3 iC4 nC4 0.136 7026 1.91 12.924 4526 0.92 Component CO2 130 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.) B&C-Mixture-4 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-5 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-5 Reservoir B&C-Mixture-5 160 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 N2 0.67 C1 C2 58.913 3526 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.41 28.815 2026 0.00 C3 iC4 nC4 0.00 .67 0.00 H2S 0.836 2526 0.00 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.

999 5014 1.787 SgC7+ 0.) Reservoir FINA-ET.67 N2 2.092 6014 1.839 SgC7+ 0.23 0. H2S 16 H2S 7.928 161 1.62 C1 59.843 MC7+ 3854 0.911 4026 0.67 iC5 0.22 125. H2S 5.129 7026 1.849 4014 0.0 0.69 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.15 0.1 (Contd.7500 4014 0.914 4014 0.55 3.92 4.84 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.22 125.69 0.69 1.845 SgC7+ 0.864 4514 0.79 0.68 C1 66.4 Component CO2 219 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.56 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.15 0.70 3814 0.01 0.74 11.2 C7+ 4.67 N2 2.01 0. 3514 0.83 iC5 0.042 5514 1.09 0. H2S 5.955 4514 0.0 3014 4014 nC5 .894 5014 0.7880 3914 0.947 4526 0.83 N2 1.55 3.59 3.Table E.09 C1 63.901 5014 0.901 T (oF) Component CO2 200 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.82 0.02 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.80 iC5 0.47 0.946 T (oF) Component CO2 150 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.859 5014 0.193 T (oF) 3.78 nC6 139.142 6514 1.0 3014 0.824 MC7+ 3514 0.7500 0.857 4514 0.764 3514 4514 0.47 0.22 MC7+ 0.033 6026 1.20 2.84 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.00 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.23 0.22 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.ALCreek-10-7 Reservoir FINAWINDFALL-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPILOT-PLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPILOT-PLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 3526 0.78 1.68 C1 66.227 T (oF) Component CO2 236 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.83 iC5 0.989 5026 1.13 15.13 15.15 N2 1.

47 0.655 3014 0. N2 0.01 0.67 N2 2.61 C1 64.7000 Component CO2 P (psia) H2S C7+ 125.0 H2S 4.47 0.0 3014 4514 nC6 125.20 MC7+ iC5 0.888 SgC7+ 0.93 0.55 3.) Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPILOT-PLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPILOT-PLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir T (oF) Component CO2 250 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.748 5014 0.30 N2 0.13 15.32 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.67 N2 2.834 T (oF) 4.68 C1 66.0 1014 0.11 0.7500 4014 0.51 27.20 0.816 MC7+ 2014 0.22 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0. H2S 5.15 0.27 0.714 2014 0.Table E.12 0.84 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.1 (Contd.7500 4014 0.96 Component CO2 300 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.912 MC7+ 3514 0.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.51 27.764 SgC7+ 0.93 0.12 0.68 C1 66.877 MC7+ 3514 0.22 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.15 0.13 15.55 3.84 0.922 SgC7+ 0.0 3014 T (oF) nC5 Component CO2 H2S N2 162 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 .7 4014 0.23 SgC7+ 0.96 5014 0.7000 2514 0.20 iC5 0.83 iC5 0. 1014 0.985 T (oF) Component CO2 50 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.63 2514 0.752 3014 0.939 0.22 0.11 0.01 0. H2S 5.30 100 Mole % Zexpt.715 5014 0.84 0.61 C1 64.83 iC5 0.907 4514 0.27 0.20 103.22 0.769 4014 0.931 5014 0.32 nC5 nC6 C7+ 103.23 0.846 T (oF) 0.84 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 4.

61 C1 64.0 1014 0.51 27.30 N2 0.20 iC5 0.93 0.7000 2514 0.844 5014 0.30 N2 0.20 0.788 3014 0.93 0.824 3014 0. H2S 4.84 0.Table E.1 (Contd.857 Component CO2 150 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.27 0.84 0.61 C1 64.902 163 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.32 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.51 27.768 SgC7+ 0.93 0.895 MC7+ 2014 0.7000 2514 0.885 Component CO2 200 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt. H2S 4.32 103.61 64.809 SgC7+ 0.819 5014 0.59 0.30 N2 0.703 3014 0.27 0.0 1014 T (oF) 0.20 103.32 103. 4.7000 2514 0. H2S 4.722 SgC7+ 0.84 0.61 C1 64.27 0.51 27.12 103.84 0.20 iC5 0.27 0.11 .11 0.93 0.847 MC7+ 2014 0.869 Component CO2 175 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.784 4014 0.747 3014 0.12 0.51 27.20 iC5 0.0 1014 T (oF) 0.7000 2514 0.12 0.842 SgC7+ 0.11 0.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.20 0.771 5014 0.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.913 MC7+ 2014 0.12 0.30 0.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.32 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.871 MC7+ 2014 0.20 0.818 4014 0.708 4014 0.747 4014 0.795 5014 0.11 0.) FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 125 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.20 0.0 1014 T (oF) 0.

52 C2 5.06 H2S 6.944 MC7+ 2014 0.87 1.848 0.914 0.793 3469 0.37 0.902 4814 0.0 1014 2514 nC6 103.32 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.883 4672 0. 17.12 0.20 iC5 0.3 0.894 SgC7+ 0.44 H2S C7+ 103.899 4714 0.93 0.7000 2514 0.982 6014 1.27 0.95 MC7+ 164 iC5 0.61 C1 64.41 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 7.0 0.865 SgC7+ 0.Table E.30 N2 0.748 3014 0. 3366 0.20 0.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.832 C1 70.88 3014 0.034 6514 1.741 4014 0.62 .84 0.20 iC5 0.8000 Component CO2 P (psia) 2354 3.59 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 0.79 3414 0.0 SgC7+ 0.889 5014 0.8 iC4 nC4 0.7000 0. H2S 4.931 5514 0.841 0.93 0.79 1.63 MC7+ 0.864 0.84 0.63 0.32 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 0.931 T (oF) Component CO2 228 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.6 N2 1.11 0.24 0.27 0.02 C1 57.912 5014 0.15 0.0 1014 T (oF) nC5 2.764 5014 0.086 7014 1.30 N2 0.873 4014 0.8 3814 0.51 27.139 T (oF) 143 Mole % Zexpt.51 nC5 nC6 C7+ 150.61 C1 64.11 0.35 0.31 4.797 3514 0.11030 T (oF) Component CO2 225 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.) Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir FINAWINDFALLPROCESSINGPLANTINJECTIONGAS-T-3 Reservoir CHEVRONCLARK-LAKE11-33 Reservoir NEVIS-NO.38 C3 2.20 0.857 4514 0.925 MC7+ 2014 0. H2S 4.1 (Contd.822 4214 0.51 27.21 N2 10.814 Component CO2 250 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.29 125.12 0.55 3.

00 0.00 0.00 0.7 100 Mole % Zexpt.1 (Contd.834 3014 0.00 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 27.09 23.00 0.00 0.67 31.869 4014 0.86 0.00 0.944 5014 0.98 36.759 T (oF) 50 Mole % Zexpt.589 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 3.78 0.00 0. 1344 0.26 0.903 4514 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 26.00 0.63 59.44 Component CO2 P (psia) N2 11.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.80 Component CO2 P (psia) C1 10.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.74 165 .00 0.10 0.987 T (oF) Component CO2 50 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.90 0.17 0.72 4. 1189 0.07 0.00 0.Table E.00 0.34 58.00 0.19 0. 1014 0.7500 H2S 10.80 37.57 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 9.674 T (oF) 100 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.00 0.18 0.613 T (oF) 100 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.00 H2S H2S H2S 10.56 41.00 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.10 49.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 42.00 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1.27 63.00 0.53 50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 2.00 0. 864 0.832 2514 0.00 0.844 3514 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 1. 1454 0.00 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 2.832 2414 0.00 0.697 T (oF) 100 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.08 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) SgC7+ 0.37 54.00 0.22 45.00 0.702 50 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.00 0.779 100 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0. 984 0.11 0.00 0.29 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 9.832 2614 0.13 44. 1114 0.67 Component CO2 P (psia) H2S 10.) Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 2404 0.00 0. 664 0.47 Component CO2 P (psia) C2 11.00 0.77 4.12 0.00 0.

96 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 73.87 1.518 150 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.656 4000 0.74 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 7.00 0.611 2500 0.Al Cross 11-25-2529 W4M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir T (oF) Component CO2 150 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 10. 1064 0.00 0. 1414 0.619 3500 0.00 0.452 175 Mole % Zexpt.958 600 0.85 0.03 0.726 1364 0.92 20.00 0.00 0.04 22.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.16 53.16 0.00 0. 1374 0. 714 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 66.16 Component CO2 H2S 166 .53 0.00 0.00 0.543 150 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.00 0.65 Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.758 T (oF) Component CO2 150 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 65.95 0. 1594 0.00 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 67.00 0.14 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 9.00 0. 200 0.00 0.00 0. 664 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 1.1 (Contd.75 17.00 0.08 23.681 2000 0.89 20.635 T (oF) 150 Mole % Zexpt.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 2.00 0.27 0.41 1.00 0.15 0.871 1000 0.) Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Panther River523 Reservoir Jeff Lake Et.00 0.16 1.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 70.Table E.73 0.7 T (oF) 9.14 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 8.16 33.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 69.24 0.12 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 9.27 0.786 1500 0.85 0.06 22.00 0.17 0.598 3000 0.606 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.829 1014 0.00 0.

00 0.78 3000 0.77 2500 0.00 0.972 600 0.00 0.41 1.00 0.1 (Contd.66 3500 0.00 0.00 0.Al Cross 6-32-2528 W4M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Jeff Lake Et.78 3500 0.00 0.695 4000 0.92 1000 0.00 0. 200 0.645 3000 0.59 2.Table E.11 0.00 0.816 T (oF) 10. 200 0.16 9.735 T (oF) 9.00 0.00 0.804 1500 0.795 4000 0.57 1.00 0.74 3500 0.00 0.873 1500 0.752 4000 0.956 600 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 167 .719 2000 0.64 59.16 33.801 2500 0.883 1500 0.Al Cross 6-32-2528 W4M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir 176 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 26.59 2. 200 0.23 Component CO2 2.64 59.97 0.66 2500 0.23 Component CO2 176 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 0.00 0.16 53.00 0.Al Cross 11-25-2529 W4M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Jeff Lake Et.816 2000 0.00 0.837 2000 0.57 1.776 T (oF) Component CO2 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 26.) Jeff Lake Et.924 1000 0.97 0.00 0.744 3000 0.876 1000 0.972 600 0.

849 3500 0.75 0.846 3000 0.68 83.00 0.00 0.46 0.38 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 13.86 2500 0.851 1500 0. 200 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.913 1013 0.47 10.46 0.915 1500 0.Al Cross 11-3-2528 W4M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Jeff Lake Et.69 2.942 1000 0.863 4000 0.772 2013 0.902 1000 0.748 3513 0.825 3.749 3500 0.755 2500 0.809 T (oF) Component CO2 176 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.781 4013 0.736 2513 0.976 600 0.38 6. Gr.08 0.00 0.00 0.) Jeff Lake Et.7860 H2S N2 168 .00 0.72 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ H2S 13.95 0.69 2.Al Cross 11-3-2528 W4M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Imperial FINA Wildcat Hills 635-27-6 W5M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir 100 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.00 N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 3.86 0.47 10.Table E.73 3013 0.74 3000 0.795 2000 0.00 0.1 (Contd.60 7+ Fraction Mole Wt.884 T (oF) 75 Mole % Zexpt.00 0.775 4000 0. 200 0.74 2. 513 0. 0.00 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 3.835 1513 0.00 70.00 70. 139 Component CO2 Sp.23 0.08 0.963 600 0.00 0.25 0.884 2000 0.

86 0.75 0.878 2513 0.1 (Contd.882 1513 0.25 0.21 0. 139 Sp.52 0.72 7+ Fraction Mole Wt.86 0. 83.889 2013 0. 513 0. 513 0.08 0.95 7+ Fraction Mole Wt.00 89.74 2.60 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 3. Gr.949 1013 0.95 0.68 Sp.934 1013 0. 139 Sp.774 3513 0. 513 0. Gr.08 0.06 0.845 2013 0.72 7+ Fraction Mole Wt.773 2513 0.08 0.60 3.837 T (oF) 132 Mole % Zexpt.912 1513 0.00 169 .808 2013 0.10 0.7860 Component CO2 P (psia) 0.89 4013 0.20 0.23 0.75 0.812 3013 0.68 83.914 T (oF) 6.762 3013 0.801 4013 0.74 2.08 0. 0.72 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 3.06 0.68 83.16 0. Gr.23 0. 139 Component CO2 P (psia) T (oF) 6.863 1513 0.23 0.7860 6.874 3013 0. 0.) Imperial FINA Wildcat Hills 635-27-6 W5M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Imperial FINA Wildcat Hills 635-27-6 W5M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Imperial FINA Wildcat Hills 635-27-6 W5M (Smoothed Data) Reservoir Imperial Mobil Brazeau River 6-11 (Smoothed Data) 99 Mole % P (psia) Zexpt.08 0.82 2513 0.08 0.86 0.25 0.66 H2S N2 C1 C2 C3 iC4 nC4 iC5 nC5 nC6 C7+ 2.876 3513 0.7860 Component CO2 P (psia) 3.34 3.25 0.95 0.928 1013 0.06 0.75 0. 0.Table E.08 0.23 0.872 189 Mole % Zexpt.74 2.60 210 Mole % Zexpt.821 3513 0.50 0.842 4013 0.

139 Sp. 0.935 7+ Fraction Mole Wt.904 2513 0.913 2085 0.Table E.1 (Contd.948 1063 0.919 4013 0.934 1516 0.7860 170 .) 813 0.898 2828 0.906 3743 0. Gr.9 3013 0.901 3429 0.

LLS 400 psia 1.75 0.7 Reduced Temperature Figure F.1: Z-factor for pure substances (Methane).2: Z-factor for pure substances (n-Decane).3 2.55 0.5 2.1 2.7 1.APPENDIX F PREDICTION OF Z-FACTOR FROM LLS EOS Methane Z-Factor (LLS EOS) 1.813 0.5 Z-Factor 1500 Expt. LLS 1500 psia 0.758 1.923 2000 Expt LLS 2000 psia 3000 Expt 0.0 0.5 1.0 3000 Expt LLS 3000 psia 4000 Expt LLS 4000 Psia 0.70 0.60 0.0 400 Expt.85 .033 400 Expt.868 LLS 3000 psia 4000 Expt LLS 4000 Psia 0. n-Decane Z.088 1. 0. LLS 1500 psia 2000 Expt LLS 2000 psia 1.Factor (LLS EOS) 2.5 0.80 Reduced Temperature Figure F.5 2.50 0.65 0. 171 0.9 2.978 Z-Factor LLS 400 psia 1500 Expt.

01 1.4 LLS 4000 Psia 0.92 1.375 3000 Expt LLS 3000 psia 4000 Expt LLS 4000 Psia 0.4: Z-factor for pure substances (Hydrogen Sulfide).Carbon Dioxide Z-Factor (LLS EOS) 1 0. LLS 400 psia 0.1 1.3: Z-factor for pure substances (Carbon Dioxide).83 0.5625 1500 Expt.74 0.1875 0 0.6 2000 Expt LLS 2000 psia 3000 Expt LLS 3000 psia 4000 Expt 0.9 1.9375 0. LLS 1500 psia 2000 Expt LLS 2000 psia 0. LLS 1500 psia 0.10 1.8 400 Expt.75 Z-Factor 400 Expt.3 1.19 Reduced Temperature Figure F.7 Reduced Temperature Figure F. Z-Factor LLS 400 psia 1500 Expt. Hydrogen Sulfide Z-Factor (LLS EOS) 0.5 1.2 0. 172 .

Z-Factor LLS 400 psia 1500 Expt.20 Reduced Temperature Figure F. 173 4. 1.60 4.145 1.97 2.11 400 Expt.00 3.005 0.80 .04 3000 Expt LLS 3000 psia 4000 Expt LLS 4000 Psia 1.5: Z-factor for pure substances (Nitrogen).40 3.Nitrogen Z-Factor (LLS EOS) 1.075 LLS 1500 psia 2000 Expt LLS 2000 psia 1.

9.BIJD(I.2.Ncomp Do 121 J=1.0.J=1.0.9.tc(I).0.pc(I).BIJB.1.2.zc(I).5.BIJA(15.5.9) Do 220 I=1.1.*)wm(I).0 IT=0 XC(1)=XCMP(J) XC(2)=1.6.STATUS='old') OPEN (UNIT=6.0.TXT'.ac(I).*)' C1 Mole Fraction = '.2.*)I.4.0.ZZV(5.Zexpt(30.15).0.pc(I).3.7.Alp(I).0& .GT.BIJC(I.0.zc(I). bc(20).tc(I) 20 Continue R = 10.*) TT.1.J).*)NData do 20 I = 1.0 Do 140 I=1.XC(2) 125 Format(/) Do 145 IB=1.FILE='OUTPUT_SageLaceyC1-C2_ZFactData.BIJC(15.APDB(5).TXT'.3.P(30).6.1.1.wm. wm(20).PP(J).73 ! BIJA = Average Acentric Factor ! BIJB = Average Molecular Weight ! BIJC = Average of Acentric Factor X Molecular Weight ! BIJD = Average of Tc / Sqrt(Pc) Do 100 K=1.PP(30).5.NDataP 174 .3.tc.1.1. 1) GO TO 122 Do 121 I=1.125) Write (6.XC(1).I=1.*)I.15.30).Corr(20).8. zc(20).0.5.0.1.BIJB(I.5.bc(I) 220 continue ! Computation of Binary Interaction Parameter Call BinIJ(Ncomp.coeff(4). pc(20).30/ Data TTR/0.7.PP.J).*) (XCMP(J).NData Read (5.25.AF(I).3.1.5.Alp(I).ac(I).7.30) Data PPR/0.2 Read (5.Bet(I).5.4.3.0.FILE='Input_SageLaceyC1-C2_ZFactData.*) BIJA(I.BWR(20).BIJC.TTR(20).4.TT.2 ! Write (6.9) 120 Continue Do 160 J=1.6. BIJA.pc(I).I=1.1.9.(Zexpt(J.tc(I). AF(20).NDataP Read (5.0.9) ! Write (6.9 AAPD=0.*)PP(J).omgw(I).ac(I).*)Ncomp.(Zexpt(J.4.J) 121 Continue 122 Continue Do 120 J=1.9.8.5. tc(20).APPENDIX G FORTRAN PROGRAMS ! Z-FACTOR PROGRAM BY LLS EOS METHOD FOR MIXTURES DIMENSION root(3).bc(I) ! write(6.0.15).4 IT=0 AAPD=0.AF(I).AF(I).2.5/ OPEN (UNIT=5.I).tc(I) Call Para(AF(I).1.TT.5. Bet(20).0.1.15) Dimension Alp(20).*) 'LLS-MIXTURE-Sage and LaceyC1-C2_ZFactData' Read (5.4.10.*)wm(I).zc(I).5.STATUS='unknown') WRITE (6.pc(I).wm(I).bc(I)) ! write(6.7.wm(I).0.0.Bet(I).XC(20).15).5.J).0.R.8.5.1.2.& BIJB(15.Bet(I).XCMP(20).1.5.0-XC(1) Write (6.0.TT.Alp(I).Ncomp write(6.zc(I).BIJD(15.8.omgw(I).NDataP Read (5. ac(20).pc.6.20.I).BIJD) ! If( K .TT.' C2 Mole Fraction = '.1.AF.5. omgw(20) Dimension PPR(40).

XC.R.N1=1.pc.Pcm) DenV=PP(I)*wmix/(ZV*R*TT) APD=((ZV-Zexpt(I. 1)Call Mixrule(Ncomp. Alp. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).J). wm.RT(3) w=AF theta = 0. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) 70 Continue ZV=Rmax ZL=Rmin Return End Subroutine ZRedMix (Alp.*) 'Root='.0) omgW=0. bc. 2)Call Mixrule(Ncomp. AT. Betm.bm.51)(APDB(N1). Alpm.APD ZZV(IB. ZV.*)'End of Data = '. bm. bc.5F8. Betm. R.005783*w/(sqrt(wm)) tmp = tr ** (-theta/2.pc.*)'Average Absolute Percent Deviation = '.K ! write(6. AF. bm. ZL) call TcPcMix(am.763758*w + 0.(ZZV(N1.tc.EQ. am. RT) ! write(6.tc.LT.tc.tr.wm.LE. XC. Alpm. Alpm.25) 160 Continue 25 Format(/) 100 Continue close(5) close(6) STOP END Subroutine Zfactr (Alp. AF. Zc.NDataP write (6. ac. Alp.5F8.2) write(6.GT. T.RT Rmin = 1.Zexpt(I. 4)Call Mixrule(Ncomp.AFmix) If(IB .EQ. am. Coef(2) = -(1. Alp.0) Go to 70 if (RT(I).AF.720661*w*w . bm.0+(omgW-1.AFmix) If(IB .I)=ZV 15 Format(2F8. Bet.ZV. XC.J) 146 Continue write(6.4.AFmix) call Zfactr (Alpm. wm.309833 + 1. ZV.PP(I). wm.AFmix) If(IB .If(IB .pc.1. Coef. R.15) TT.BIJA.363589*w**3 .15) TT.Tcm.pc. 0. Bet. bm.Pr.EQ.BIJB. ZL) Dimension Coef(4). Bet.wmix.0+0. ZV. Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I).0)*Zc)**3 omgb = omgW*Zc 175 . ac.0 AAPD=AAPD+ABS(APD) ! ! write (6.wmix.1. Bet. Bet. AF.E-10 Do 70 I=1.EQ.I). wm.LT.J))*100. PP(I). Bet. bm.BIJD.Betm. am.wmix. AF. am. Betm.E+10 Rmax = 1. ZL) Dimension Coef(4).J))/Zexpt(I. am.3 if (RT(I).AAPD 145 Continue Do 146 I=1. ac.4) 140 Continue DatP=NDataP AAPD=AAPD/DatP APDB(IB)=AAPD ! write(6.Alpm. TT.4) 51 Format(16X. 3)Call Mixrule(Ncomp.PP(I). Alpm.361/(1.N1=1. Betm. bc. ac.tc.0274*w) omga=(1.BIJC. Alp.*) write (6. Betm.4).+(1-Alp)*BB) Coef(3) = AA-(Alp*BB)-(Bet+Alp)*BB**2 Coef(4) = -(AA*BB-Bet*(BB**2+BB**3)) Call Cubic (MTYPE. BC.Zexpt(I. P. XC.ZL. bc.RT(3) AA = AT*P/(R**2*T**2) BB = BC*P/(R*T) Coef(1) = 1.wmix.

0/Zc+(1.3 if (RT(I). Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I).0-Alp)*omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr)) Coef(3) = omga*Pr/(Zc**2*tr**(2+theta))-Alp*omgb*Pr/(Zc**2*tr)-(Alp+Bet)*(omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr))**2 Coef(4) = -(omga*omgb*Pr**2/(Zc**3*tr**(3+theta))-Bet*(1.) Coef(3) = 3*Alp+6. RT) Rmin = 1.R.9*Alp*Bet+ 3. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).E-10 Do 70 I=1.E+10 Rmax = 1.*) 'Root='.betm.3 if (RT(I).0) Go to 70 if (RT(I). RTZ) denom = 3*zc**2+(alpm+betm)*Bc**2+alpm*Bc 176 .0) Go to 70 if (RT(I).GT. Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I). Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I).LT. Bc. Zc. Bet. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) Continue ZV=Rmax ZL=Rmin Zc = Rmax Return End Subroutine Bcfact (Alp. Coef. Zc.E-10 Do 70 I=1.LT. Bet. Coef(2) = -(3*Alp**2-15 *Alp+27*Bet-15.LE.RTB) call Zcfactr (alpm. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).LT.3 if (RT(I). RT) Dimension Coef(4). RT) ! write(6.Pcm) Dimension RTB(3).LT. Coef(4) = -1.E-10 Do 70 I=1. Coef.RT) Dimension Coef(4). Call Cubic (MTYPE. 0.0/Zc*(omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr))**2+(omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr))**3)) Call Cubic (MTYPE. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).RT(3) Coef(1) = Alp**3 + 6*Alp**2+ 12*Alp + 8.alpm.0 Coef(2) = -(1.E+10 Rmax = 1.0) Go to 70 if (RT(I). RT) Rmin = 1.RT Rmin = 1. RTZ(3) call Bcfact (alpm. 0.E+10 Rmax = 1. 0. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) 70 Continue ZV=Rmax*Zc ZL=Rmin*Zc Return End ! 70 ! 70 Subroutine Zcfactr (Alp.LE. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) Continue ZV = Rmax ZL = Rmin Bc = Rmax Return End Subroutine TcPcMix(am. betm. betm.LT.bm.GT. Coef. Coef(2) = -(12*Alp**2+12 *Alp + 9*Bet.) Coef(3) = 6*Alp**2 + 3*Alp + 6*Bet . Bc.LT.Coef(1) = 1.GT.RT(3) Coef(1) = Alp**3 + 6*Alp**2+ 12*Alp + 8.LE.6*Alp*Bet Coef(4) = -(Alp**2+Bet-Alp*Bet) Call Cubic (MTYPE.Tcm.

BIJD(15.pc.GT.wmmix.005783*AF/sqrt(wm) tmp = tr ** (-theta/2.pc(20) Dimension BIJA(15. wm.BIJB(15.wm.R.tc(20).tc.5 If(AFI.J) SumAlpm = SumAlpm + x(I)*x(J)*sqrt(Alp(I))*sqrt(Alp(J))*BIN(I.309833 + 1.Ncomp AFI=AF(I) AFJ=AF(J) WMI=wm(I) WMJ=wm(J) AFWI=wm(I)*AF(I) AFWJ=wm(J)*AF(J) TPCI=tc(I)/sqrt(pc(I)) TPCJ=tc(J)/sqrt(pc(J)) ! If(AFI.0*zc)/(omgww*zc) Bet = (zc*zc*(omgww-1. Bet.0 Do 10 I = 1.0-3. bc.15) Sumam = 0.AFmix) Dimension x(20).763758*AF + 0.Ncomp Sumbm = Sumbm + x(I)*bc(I) AFmix=AFmix+x(I)*sqrt(AF(I)) wmmix=wmmix+x(I)*sqrt(wm(I)) SumbmLLS = SumbmLLS + x(I)*bc(I)**(1.08627*AF+0.0 AFmix=AFmix**2 wmmix=wmmix**2 Return End Subroutine BinIJ(Ncomp.BIJC(15.0*zc))/(omgww**2*zc) omga = (1.ac.BIN(15.LE.1.0+(omgww-1.pc.Alp.BIJD) Dimension AF(20).19708+0.J) 10 Continue bmLLS = (SumbmLLS)**3.4.0) Do 10 J = 1.bc) omgww = 0. x.720661*AF*AF .0/3.J)= (AFJ/AFI)**0.0) theta = 0.J) = (AFI/AFJ)**0.0+0. wm(20).BIJC. AF(20). Alp(20).Ncomp Do 10 J = 1. Bet(20).tc.0 SumbmLLS = 0.wm(20).0 wmmix = 0.tc. Alp.15).AFJ) BIJA(I.Bet.0)*zc)**3. bc(20). ac.361/(1.0 AFmix = 0.tc(20).15).0 SumAlpm = 0.0274*AF) Alp = (1.0*zc*omgww**2)+& omgww*(1.Ncomp Sumam = Sumam + x(I)*x(J)*sqrt(ac(I))*sqrt(ac(J))*BIN(I.bmLLS.0+omgww*zc-3. BIJA.5 ! 177 . ac(20).AF. Sumam.35714*AF**2+3.15).J) SumBetm = SumBetm + x(I)*x(J)*sqrt(Bet(I))*sqrt(Bet(J))*BIN(I.AFJ) BIJA(I.0)**3.BIJB.59015E-03*AF*wm tmp = tr**(-theta) CB = omgb*R*tc/pc CA = omga*R**2*tc**2/pc ac = CA*tmp bc = CB Return End Subroutine Mixrule(Ncomp.0 SumBetm = 0.0+(2.pc(20).Pcm = (am*Bc**2)/(bm**2*denom) Tcm = (am*Bc)/(bm*R*denom) return End ! ! Subroutine Para(AF.BIN.15) Do 10 I = 1.TT. SumBetm.wm. AF. SumAlpm.zc.0 omgb = omgww*zc tr = TT/tc theta = 0.pc.363589*AF**3 .

AFWJ) BIJC(I.100.0-RCOT**2)))/3.WMJ) BIJB(I.5 ! If(TPCI.LE.80 SIS=-1.If(WMI.0 FACT=2.86602540*(R-S) GO TO 130 MTYPE = -1 Three Dissimilar and Real Roots QUOT=SQBOV/CUAOV RCOT=SQRT(-QUOT) IF (BBT) 110.J) = (AFWI/AFWJ)**0.10.0*B10V3**3-B(2)*B10V3+B(3) BETOV=BBT/2.30.GT.0 IF (RCU) 50.J) = (AFWJ/AFWI)**0.20 Z(1) = -2.60 SIR=-1.TPCJ) BIJD(I.0 ALFOV=ALF/3.60.LE.GT.0 GO TO 120 PEI=ATAN(SQRT(1.TPCJ) BIJD(I.J) = (WMJ/WMI)**0.40 MTYPE = 0 Three Equal Roots GAM=SQRT(-ALFOV) IF (BBT) 30.0-RCOT**2)/RCOT)/3.3333333333 Z(1)=R+S-B10V3 Z(2)=-(R+S)/2.5 If(AFWI.LE.J) = (TPCI/TPCJ)**0.0 R=SIR*(SIR*RCU)**0.J) = (TPCJ/TPCI)**0.0-B10V3 Z(3)=0.5 10 Continue Return End Subroutine Cubic(MTYPE. Z(3) 10 ! 20 30 40 ! 50 60 70 80 90 ! 100 110 120 B(1)=A(2)/A(1) B10V3=B(1)/3.0 B(2)=A(3)/A(1) B(3)=A(4)/A(1) ALF=B(2)-B(1)*B10V3 BBT=2.0*GAM-B10V3 Z(2) = -GAM-B10V3 Z(3) = Z(2) GO TO 130 MTYPE = 1 One Real Root & 2 Imaginary Conjugate Roots EPS=SQRT(DEL) TAU=-BETOV RCU=TAU+EPS SCU=TAU-EPS SIR=1.0 CUAOV=ALFOV**3 SQBOV=BETOV**2 DEL=SQBOV+CUAOV IF (DEL) 90.Z) DIMENSION B(3). A(4).WMJ) BIJB(I.0*SQRT(-ALFOV) Z(1)=FACT*COS(PEI)-B10V3 178 .0 SIS=1.3333333333 S=SIS*(SIS*SCU)**0.5 If(TPCI.GT.0 IF (SCU) 70.5707963+ATAN(RCOT/SQRT(1.100 PEI=(1.5 ! If(AFWI.A.5 If(WMI.J) = (WMI/WMJ)**0.AFWJ) BIJC(I.0*GAM-B10V3 Z(2) = GAM-B10V3 Z(3) = Z(2) GO TO 130 Z(1) = 2.80.

coeff(4).9. zc(20).STATUS='unknown') WRITE (6.15.3) 127 Format(/) IT=IT+1 122 Continue ! write(6.6.30).0943951 Z(2)=FACT*COS(PEI)-B10V3 PEI=PEI+2.Alp(I).PP(K).1.0 179 .8.15).1.omgw(I).7.8.1.5.Bet(I).127) 126 Format(12F6.5.BIJB(15.130 ! PEI=PEI+2.99 RETURN END Z-FACTOR PROGRAM BY LLS EOS METHOD FOR MIXTURES DIMENSION root(3).tc(I).ZZV(5.GT.5/ OPEN (UNIT=5.wm(I).0.0& .STATUS='old') OPEN (UNIT=6.6. ac(20).5.0 ! BIJA = Average Acentric Factor ! BIJB = Average Molecular Weight ! BIJC = Average of Acentric Factor X Molecular Weight ! BIJD = Average of Tc / Sqrt(Pc) IT=1 Do 100 K=1.8.4.126) (BIJB(II.6.Bet(I).zc(I).*)XC(I).*)I.PP(K).2.1.AF(I).bc(I) 20 continue ! Computation of Binary Interaction Parameter Call BinIJ(Ncomp.Ncomp 123 write(6.AF.0943951 Z(3)=FACT*COS(PEI)-B10V3 CONTINUE IF (MTYPE .*)XC(I). omgw(20) Dimension PPR(40).FILE='Input-Elsh_SPE74369.5.5.I=1.tc.4 AAPD=0.tc(I). 1) Z(3) = -99.126) (BIJA(II.tc(I) ! Write (6.25.TTR(20).5.5.Ncomp 124 write(6.ac(I).4.JJ).0.0.3.*)I.2.0.10.5.*)Ncomp.Ncomp) write(6.pc(I).1.bc(I)) ! write(6.Bet(I).AF(I).2.Ncomp) write(6.BIJC.1.99 IF (MTYPE .1.PP(K) do 20 I = 1.127) Do 123 II=1.JJ).FILE='OUTPUT-LLS-Elsh-SPE74369.wm(I).P(20). bc(20).0.9.Zexpt(20). BIJA.3.zc(I).2.TXT'.30/ Data TTR/0.Ncomp) write(6.0.zc(I).127) Do 125 II=1.15).3.20).bc(I) ! write(6.wm.TT.1.XC(20).*)(Zexpt(I).TT(K).TT(K) ! Write (6.K Do 145 IB=1.zc(I).4. 1) GO TO 122 Do 121 II=1.NData Read (5.9.pc.BIJA(15.0.NData) R = 10.2.1.1.ac(I).126) (BIJC(II.9.TT(K).4.1.*)NData Read (5.0. tc(20).BIJD) ! If(IT .ac(I).Alp(I). AF(20).Ncomp 121 write(6.*) 'LLS-Elsh-SPE74369' Read (5.1.0.127) Do 124 II=1.pc(I).15).3.73 AAPD=0.5. pc(20) Data PPR/0.JJ).BIJB.5.15) Dimension APDB(5.wm(I).7.pc(I).7. 1) Z(2) = -99.TT(30).JJ).BIJD(15.TXT'.DEV(5).EQ.JJ=II.*) Ncomp.0.6.JJ=II.TT(K).omgw(I).0.0.JJ=II.AF(I).20.0.0.Alp(I).7. Bet(20).BIJC(15.5.4.126) (BIJD(II.1.*)'End of Data = '.3.5.JJ=II.wm(I).5.Ncomp) write(6.8.0.PP(30) Dimension Alp(20).Ncomp Read (5.0.1.Ncomp 125 write(6.EQ. wm(20).0.pc(I).tc(I) Call Para(AF(I).5.1.R.

Alp. XC.wmix.0 Do 147 I=1. wm. Betm.pc.2) close(5) close(6) STOP END Subroutine Zfactr (Alp. Alpm.15) TT(K).pc.I) 147 Continue DEV(1)=APDA2/Dat DEV(2)=APDB2/Dat DEV(3)=APDC2/Dat DEV(4)=APDD2/Dat write(6. XC.wmix. Alpm. bm. ZL) Dimension Coef(4).0 APDC2=0. XC. 1)Call Mixrule(Ncomp. R.E-10 Do 70 I=1.BIJD. 0. ZV. PP(K).N1=1. RT) ! write(6. am.N1=1.EQ. XC. XC.(ZZV(N1.BIJA.tc.K)=ZV 15 Format(2F8.If(IB .tc.AAPD Do 146 I=1.LE. bm.tc.AFmix) ! call Mixrule(Ncomp.RT Rmin = 1. 2)Call Mixrule(Ncomp. bc.pc. Bet. Alpm.1.wmix. AT.tc.PP(I).pc. BC. ZL) call TcPcMix(am. wm.Zexpt(I) 146 Continue APDA2=0. ac.bm.tc. ZV.Tcm. ac.ZL. ac. bm. Alpm.0 AAPD=AAPD+ABS(APD) APDB(IB.Alpm.5F8. Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I).*). wm.3 if (RT(I). Bet.Alp. Bet. Bet. Alpm.R. am.0 APDB2=0.wmix.4) 51 Format(16X.AFmix) If(IB .0) Go to 70 if (RT(I).I) APDB2=APDB2+APDB(2. Coef(2) = -(1. bc.Pcm) ! DenV=PP*wmix/(ZV*R*TT(K)) APD=((ZV-Zexpt(K))/Zexpt(K))*100.AFmix) If(IB . Betm. bm.EQ.*) 'Root='.BIJC. Alp.LT. bm.*)'Average Absolute Percent Deviation = '.BIJB.AFmix) call Zfactr (Alpm. wm.5F8. Bet.RT(3) AA = AT*P/(R**2*T**2) BB = BC*P/(R*T) Coef(1) = 1. bc. Betm. AF.E+10 Rmax = 1.pc.NData write (6. TT(K).GT.I) APDD2=APDD2+APDB(4. Alp.0 APDD2=0. R.EQ. bc.I) APDC2=APDC2+APDB(3.EQ.write (6. Betm. am.NData APDA2=APDA2+APDB(1. AF.K)=AAPD ! write (6.51)(DEV(N1). 4)Call Mixrule(Ncomp. bc.PP(K).4) 145 Continue 100 continue Dat=NData AAPD=AAPD/Dat ! write(6.*) ! write (6.+(1-Alp)*BB) Coef(3) = AA-(Alp*BB)-(Bet+Alp)*BB**2 Coef(4) = -(AA*BB-Bet*(BB**2+BB**3)) Call Cubic (MTYPE.Zexpt(K). AF. Coef. P.15) TT(I).LT. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) 70 Continue ZV=Rmax ZL=Rmin Return End 180 .wmix.I). AF. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I). Alp.4). wm. am. am. AF.AFmix) If(IB . ac. Betm. ac.Betm. T. bm. Betm.ZV.APD ZZV(IB. Bet. am. 3)Call Mixrule(Ncomp.

RT) Rmin = 1. Coef(2) = -(12*Alp**2+12 *Alp + 9*Bet.LE.0 Coef(2) = -(1.) Coef(3) = 3*Alp+6.363589*w**3 . Bet.RT(3) Coef(1) = Alp**3 + 6*Alp**2+ 12*Alp + 8.E+10 Rmax = 1.*) 'Root='.309833 + 1. Bet. Coef(4) = -1.3 if (RT(I). Bet.LE.361/(1. ZV.005783*w/(sqrt(wm)) tmp = tr ** (-theta/2.AF.wm. 0. Call Cubic (MTYPE.LT.0+0. Coef.0) Go to 70 if (RT(I). 0. Coef.) Coef(3) = 6*Alp**2 + 3*Alp + 6*Bet . Coef(2) = -(3*Alp**2-15 *Alp+27*Bet-15.9*Alp*Bet+ 3.3 if (RT(I).RT(3) Coef(1) = Alp**3 + 6*Alp**2+ 12*Alp + 8.0/Zc*(omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr))**2+(omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr))**3)) Call Cubic (MTYPE. ZL) Dimension Coef(4).0) Go to 70 if (RT(I). Zc.E+10 Rmax = 1. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) Continue ZV=Rmax ZL=Rmin Zc = Rmax Return End Subroutine Bcfact (Alp. Coef. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) 70 Continue ZV=Rmax*Zc ZL=Rmin*Zc Return End ! 70 ! 70 Subroutine Zcfactr (Alp.0+(omgW-1.LT.0) Go to 70 if (RT(I). BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).E-10 Do 70 I=1. 0. Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I).0)*Zc)**3 omgb = omgW*Zc Coef(1) = 1.763758*w + 0. Zc.0274*w) omga=(1.720661*w*w .LT.3 if (RT(I).LE. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).GT.RT) Dimension Coef(4). RT) Dimension Coef(4).0-Alp)*omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr)) Coef(3) = omga*Pr/(Zc**2*tr**(2+theta))-Alp*omgb*Pr/(Zc**2*tr)-(Alp+Bet)*(omgb*Pr/(Zc*tr))**2 Coef(4) = -(omga*omgb*Pr**2/(Zc**3*tr**(3+theta))-Bet*(1.GT.LT.E-10 Do 70 I=1.4.RT(3) w=AF theta = 0.GT.E-10 Do 70 I=1.LT. Bc.0/Zc+(1. Rmin) Rmin = RT(I) Continue ZV = Rmax ZL = Rmin Bc = Rmax 181 . Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I).RT Rmin = 1. RT) ! write(6.1.LT.0) omgW=0.tr. Rmax) Rmax = RT(I) if (RT(I). RT) Rmin = 1.E+10 Rmax = 1.Subroutine ZRedMix (Alp. BB) Go to 70 if (RT(I).6*Alp*Bet Coef(4) = -(Alp**2+Bet-Alp*Bet) Call Cubic (MTYPE.Pr.

tc.R. SumAlpm.Pcm) Dimension RTB(3). RTZ) denom = 3*zc**2+(alpm+betm)*Bc**2+alpm*Bc Pcm = (am*Bc**2)/(bm**2*denom) Tcm = (am*Bc)/(bm*R*denom) return End ! ! Subroutine Para(AF.Ncomp Sumbm = Sumbm + x(I)*bc(I) AFmix=AFmix+x(I)*sqrt(AF(I)) wmmix=wmmix+x(I)*sqrt(wm(I)) SumbmLLS = SumbmLLS + x(I)*bc(I)**(1.pc.0 AFmix = 0.TT.1.BIJB. wm.0+(2.Ncomp Sumam = Sumam + x(I)*x(J)*sqrt(ac(I))*sqrt(ac(J))*BIN(I.19708+0.BIN(15.763758*AF + 0.363589*AF**3 .0 wmmix = 0.pc. AF.BIJC.0274*AF) Alp = (1.0) theta = 0.tc.005783*AF/sqrt(wm) tmp = tr ** (-theta/2.15) Sumam = 0.& tc(20).tc.BIJD(15. Zc.15).4.59015E-03*AF*wm tmp = tr**(-theta) CB = omgb*R*tc/pc CA = omga*R**2*tc**2/pc ac = CA*tmp bc = CB Return End Subroutine Mixrule(Ncomp.0*zc)/(omgww*zc) Bet = (zc*zc*(omgww-1.Alp. SumBetm.R.Return End Subroutine TcPcMix(am. AF(20).bc) omgww = 0.35714*AF**2+3.wm.309833 + 1.AF.0+0.J) SumAlpm = SumAlpm + x(I)*x(J)*sqrt(Alp(I))*sqrt(Alp(J))*BIN(I.betm.pc.zc.Ncomp AFI=AF(I) AFJ=AF(J) WMI=wm(I) 182 .0 omgb = omgww*zc tr = TT/tc theta = 0.wm(20).0/3. betm. Bet.0 SumAlpm = 0.0)*zc)**3.wmmix.bm.0 SumBetm = 0.ac.BIJC(15.wm.J) SumBetm = SumBetm + x(I)*x(J)*sqrt(Bet(I))*sqrt(Bet(J))*BIN(I.15) Do 10 I = 1.08627*AF+0. BIJA.15).pc(20). Sumam. Bc.BIN. bc. betm. Alp(20).0*zc))/(omgww**2*zc) omga = (1.0)**3.0+(omgww-1.Tcm.361/(1.alpm. x.Ncomp Do 10 J = 1.0*zc*omgww**2)+& omgww*(1.0 SumbmLLS = 0.0) Do 10 J = 1.J) 10 Continue bmLLS = (SumbmLLS)**3.BIJB(15. Bet(20).RTB) call Zcfactr (alpm.AFmix) Dimension x(20).Bet. wm(20).0-3. RTZ(3) call Bcfact (alpm.BIJD) Dimension AF(20). bc(20).0 AFmix=AFmix**2 wmmix=wmmix**2 Return End Subroutine BinIJ(Ncomp.tc(20). ac.720661*AF*AF .bmLLS. Alp.pc(20) Dimension BIJA(15. ac(20).0+omgww*zc-3.0 Do 10 I = 1.15).

80.AFWJ) BIJC(I.J) = (WMJ/WMI)**0.J)= (AFJ/AFI)**0.5 If(TPCI.5 If(AFWI.GT.A.AFWJ) BIJC(I.GT.0 SIS=1.60 SIR=-1.AFJ) BIJA(I.40 MTYPE = 0 Three Equal Roots GAM=SQRT(-ALFOV) IF (BBT) 30.J) = (AFWJ/AFWI)**0.0-B10V3 Z(3)=0.Z) DIMENSION B(3). A(4).J) = (WMI/WMJ)**0.0 B(2)=A(3)/A(1) B(3)=A(4)/A(1) ALF=B(2)-B(1)*B10V3 BBT=2. Z(3) 10 ! 20 30 40 ! 50 60 70 80 90 B(1)=A(2)/A(1) B10V3=B(1)/3.5 If(AFI.LE.AFJ) BIJA(I.60.J) = (TPCI/TPCJ)**0.LE.J) = (TPCJ/TPCI)**0.10.GT.WMJ) BIJB(I.0*GAM-B10V3 Z(2) = -GAM-B10V3 Z(3) = Z(2) GO TO 130 MTYPE = 1 One Real Root & 2 Imaginary Conjugate Roots EPS=SQRT(DEL) TAU=-BETOV RCU=TAU+EPS SCU=TAU-EPS SIR=1.0 R=SIR*(SIR*RCU)**0.0*B10V3**3-B(2)*B10V3+B(3) BETOV=BBT/2.0 IF (RCU) 50.J) = (AFI/AFJ)**0.20 Z(1) = -2.3333333333 Z(1)=R+S-B10V3 Z(2)=-(R+S)/2.TPCJ) BIJD(I.LE.GT.5 10 Continue Return End Subroutine Cubic(MTYPE.80 SIS=-1.0*GAM-B10V3 Z(2) = GAM-B10V3 Z(3) = Z(2) GO TO 130 Z(1) = 2.5 ! If(AFWI.86602540*(R-S) GO TO 130 MTYPE = -1 183 .WMJ) BIJB(I.LE.0 IF (SCU) 70.5 ! If(TPCI.30.5 If(WMI.J) = (AFWI/AFWJ)**0.WMJ=wm(J) AFWI=wm(I)*AF(I) AFWJ=wm(J)*AF(J) TPCI=tc(I)/sqrt(pc(I)) TPCJ=tc(J)/sqrt(pc(J)) ! If(AFI.3333333333 S=SIS*(SIS*SCU)**0.0 CUAOV=ALFOV**3 SQBOV=BETOV**2 DEL=SQBOV+CUAOV IF (DEL) 90.TPCJ) BIJD(I.0 ALFOV=ALF/3.5 ! If(WMI.

0 FACT=2.99 IF (MTYPE .EQ. 1) Z(2) = -99.0 GO TO 120 PEI=ATAN(SQRT(1.0-RCOT**2)/RCOT)/3. 1) Z(3) = -99.0943951 Z(2)=FACT*COS(PEI)-B10V3 PEI=PEI+2.100 PEI=(1.5707963+ATAN(RCOT/SQRT(1.0-RCOT**2)))/3.0943951 Z(3)=FACT*COS(PEI)-B10V3 CONTINUE IF (MTYPE .! 100 110 120 130 Three Dissimilar and Real Roots QUOT=SQBOV/CUAOV RCOT=SQRT(-QUOT) IF (BBT) 110.EQ.0*SQRT(-ALFOV) Z(1)=FACT*COS(PEI)-B10V3 PEI=PEI+2.99 RETURN END 184 .100.

Agree (Permission is granted.) _______________________________________________ Student Signature _________________ Date .PERMISSION TO COPY In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master’s degree at Texas Tech University or Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. It is understood that any copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my further written permission and that any user may be liable for copyright infringement. I agree that the Library and my major department shall make it freely available for research purposes. Permission to copy this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Director of the Library or my major professor.) _______Neeraj Kumar_________ Student Signature ____09-30-2005___ Date Disagree (Permission is not granted.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful