PetroCalcHub
Calculators
All workflow tools

Soave-Redlich-Kwong (SRK) Hydrocarbon PT Flash Calculator

Calculate a C1-C6 hydrocarbon equilibrium split with the SRK EOS and compare phase compositions, vapor fractions and densities with Peng-Robinson.

Inputs

Results

Calculate to view linked results. Default values are examples, not recommended operating inputs.

Learn, compare and practice

Worked explanations, controlled studies and printable exercises connected to this calculation.

Peng Robinson versus SRK on the same supported mixture

Calculation sequence

  1. Enter the mixture's equilibrium absolute pressure and temperature, then mole fractions for methane, ethane, propane, normal butane, normal pentane and normal hexane. Fractions must sum to one within 1e-10; percentages and mass fractions are not accepted as mole fractions. Set an omitted component to zero. At least two components must be present, each at 0.001 or greater. No heavy fraction is silently assigned the properties of hexane.
  2. SRK uses the attractive denominator v times (v+b), its own critical coefficients and Soave alpha function. It is a distinct cubic model, not Peng-Robinson with a different displayed label. Compare its phase split and liquid density with the linked PR tool at exactly the same composition and conditions. Agreement between two cubic models is a sensitivity comparison, not independent measured-PVT validation. All binary interaction parameters are explicitly zero.
  3. A two-phase result contains liquid x and vapor y compositions, vapor mole fraction beta, vapor mass fraction, both phase densities and equilibrium bulk density. The component table separately shows the moles in each phase per mole of feed; adding those two allocation columns must reproduce the feed. The composition plot uses fixed C1-C6 labels, with normal isomers identified by nC4, nC5 and nC6. Zero components remain visible with zero allocations.
  4. Before returning a split, independently re-evaluate the cubic pressure equation and log fugacity coefficients at both returned phase densities. Enforce component material balance, equal fugacity, composition sums and the molar-volume lever rule. A stable single-phase result has feed composition and bulk density only: no absent-phase compositions or vapor quality are invented. The pinned native cubic phase flag is not used to assign a gas/liquid label because it mislabels some single-phase gas-density states.
  5. The engine is downloaded from this site's versioned static assets only when a flash is requested, then calculations run locally. Saved work and file backups retain canonical pressure, temperature and every feed fraction; reopening recalculates against the current version. CSV preserves the component table and canonical inputs, while PDF includes phase compositions, closure diagnostics, assumptions and sources. There is no account, uploaded composition or remote calculation service.

Worked check

At 280 K and 2 MPa, the synthetic C1-C6 feed (0.50, 0.15, 0.15, 0.10, 0.05, 0.05) gives SRK beta about 0.658743. It differs from the linked PR result despite identical feed and operating conditions. Compare phase densities as well as vapor fraction; a close phase split does not imply equally accurate liquid volumes. This example is not a field benchmark.

Synthetic examples for reproducibility, not measured field results.

Assumptions and limitations

  • Screening PT vapor-liquid equilibrium for mixtures of C1, C2, C3, nC4, nC5 and nC6 only, with conventional quadratic attraction/linear covolume mixing and kij=0. No isobutane/isopentane, C7+ pseudocomponents, water, CO2, H2S, nitrogen, brine, hydrates, wax, solids, adsorption or multiple liquid phases. Zero kij is a disclosed assumption, not a verified interaction fit for any particular sample.
  • Software bounds are 180-450 K and 0.1-10 MPa absolute, not a universal EOS accuracy envelope. Reject splits with vapor mole fraction below 1e-6 or above 1-1e-6, liquid/vapor molar-density ratio below 1.1, or maximum composition separation below 1e-4. These conservative numerical gates exclude vanishing phases and poorly separated near-critical roots; they do not prove distance from every critical point. No bubble/dew-point or complete phase-envelope tracing is performed.
  • Native stability search is limited to the implemented vapor-liquid problem; it is not proof of global stability against arbitrary additional phases. Reject component-balance error above 2e-7, log-fugacity mismatch above 2e-5 or relative EOS-pressure error above 2e-6. Numerical closure is not experimental accuracy. No enthalpy/entropy flash, Joule-Thomson valve model, separator train, heat transfer, well pressure traverse, slip/holdup or transient reservoir simulation is included.

Implemented equations

SRK cubic equation of state

p=RTv−b−a(T)v(v+b)a=∑i∑jcicjaiaj(1−kij)b=∑icibi,kij=0\begin{aligned}p&=\frac{RT}{v-b}-\frac{a(T)}{v(v+b)}\\a&=\sum_i\sum_j c_i c_j\sqrt{a_i a_j}(1-k_{ij})\\b&=\sum_i c_i b_i,\quad k_{ij}=0\end{aligned}

Fugacity equilibrium and component conservation

xiφiL=yiφiVzi=(1−β)xi+βyiKi=yi/xi0=∑izi(Ki−1)1+β(Ki−1)\begin{aligned}x_i\varphi_i^L&=y_i\varphi_i^V\\z_i&=(1-\beta)x_i+\beta y_i\\K_i&=y_i/x_i\\0&=\sum_i\frac{z_i(K_i-1)}{1+\beta(K_i-1)}\end{aligned}

Mole fraction is not mass fraction

Mz=∑iziMiwV=β∑iyiMiMzvˉ=(1−β)vL+βvVρbulk=Mz/vˉ\begin{aligned}M_z&=\sum_i z_i M_i\\w_V&=\frac{\beta\sum_i y_iM_i}{M_z}\\\bar v&=(1-\beta)v_L+\beta v_V\\\rho_{\rm bulk}&=M_z/\bar v\end{aligned}

Sources and maintenance

Published by PetroCalcHub Team. Implementation and source checks: . This does not claim independent expert review.

Report a correction

Related tools and references

What a compositional flash calculation solvesExpanded gas/isomer PR flashWet-mixture three-phase screeningIsentropic PR outletBubble/dew pressure bandThree-stage separator trainC7+ characterization and PR equilibriumPR heat-duty / isenthalpic flashSRK heat-duty / isenthalpic flashCompare the Peng-Robinson flashReduced-property gas Z comparisonBlack-oil PVT correlation comparisonPure-water thermal/pressure traverseGas formation volume factorPetroleum PVT guide