I noticed that the critical point in the fluid file for the Lennard-Jones fluid is inconsistent with the default parameter set for saftvrmie, and that the default parameter set for saftvrmie gives a critical point below 50 K (the default minimum temperature for the numerical solvers. Additionally, the critical point solver fails for pure LJF, even though tmin is set below the critical point, unless the "correct" values are supplied as initial guesses .
Of course, we can use any parameters to represent the LJF, but I think it would be nice to use default parameters that ensure the default behaviour is that the phase envelope is at temperatures above tmin. If we use e.g. eps_div_k=100, we can do ourselves a favour by having a simple link between reduced temperature and real temperature.
The lower limit when solving for the crtical point was too high due to the faulty critical paramaters. Modefied paramaters and added option to ovverride volume limit in solver.
I noticed that the critical point in the fluid file for the Lennard-Jones fluid is inconsistent with the default parameter set for saftvrmie, and that the default parameter set for
saftvrmie
gives a critical point below 50 K (the default minimum temperature for the numerical solvers. Additionally, the critical point solver fails for pure LJF, even thoughtmin
is set below the critical point, unless the "correct" values are supplied as initial guesses .Of course, we can use any parameters to represent the LJF, but I think it would be nice to use default parameters that ensure the default behaviour is that the phase envelope is at temperatures above
tmin
. If we use e.g.eps_div_k=100
, we can do ourselves a favour by having a simple link between reduced temperature and real temperature.