Why is the molar enthalpy of vaporization of a substance bigger than its molar enthalpy of fusion (at consistent pressure); for instance, in the case of ice and water.

You are watching: Why is latent heat of vaporization greater than fusion


*

*

Enthalpies of phase alters are essentially linked to the electrostatic potential energies in between molecules. The first point you have to understand is:

Tright here is an attrenergetic pressure in between all molecules at long(ish) ranges, and a warding off force at brief distances.

If you make a graph of potential energy vs. distance in between two molecules, it will look somepoint choose this:

*

Here the y-axis represents electrostatic potential power, the x-axis is radial separation (distance in between the centers), and also the spheres are "molecules."

Since this is a potential energy curve, you deserve to imagine the device as if it were the surface of the earth, and also gravity was the potential. In various other words, the white molecule "wants" to roll down the valley until it sits next to the gray molecule. If it were any closer than simply poignant, it would certainly need to climb up an additional incredibly steep hill. If you try to pull them away, aobtain you need to climb a hill (although it isn"t as tall or steep). The result is that unmuch less there is sufficient kinetic energy for the molecules to move apart, they tend to stick together.

Now, the potential power feature in between any kind of 2 forms of molecules will certainly be various, yet it will certainly always have the very same fundamental shape. What will certainly readjust is the "steepness," width, and also depth of the valley (or "potential power well"), and the slope of the infinitely lengthy "hill" to the best of the well.

Because we are talking around loved one enthalpies of fusion and vaporization for a provided mechanism, we do not need to concern around just how this changes for different molecules. We simply need to think around what it indicates to vaporize or melt somepoint, in the context of the spatial separation or relativity of molecules, and how that relates to the form of this surchallenge.

First let"s think about what happens when you include warm to a device of molecules (positive enthalpy change). Heat is a carry of thermal power between a hot substance and also a cold one. It is characterized by a adjust in temperature, which means that once you add warmth to something, its temperature increases (this might be common sense, but in thermodynamics it is crucial to be incredibly specific). The primary point we have to recognize around this is:

Temperature is a meacertain of the average kinetic power of all molecules in a system

In other words, as the temperature boosts, the average kinetic energy (the speed) of the molecules rises.

Let"s go earlier to the potential energy diagram between two molecules. You recognize that power is conoffered, and so ignoring losses as a result of friction (tbelow will not be any type of for molecules) the potential power that deserve to be gained by a pwrite-up is equal to the kinetic energy it began through. In other words, if the particle is at the bottom of the well and also has no kinetic energy, it is not going anywhere:

*

If it literally has actually no kinetic energy, we are at absolute zero, and also this is a suitable crystal (a solid). Real substances in the genuine civilization always have actually some thermal energy, so the molecules are always type of "wiggling" about at the bottom of their potential energy wells, even in a solid product.

The question is, just how a lot kinetic power execute you have to melt the material?

In a liquid, molecules are free to relocate but continue to be close together

This means you need enough power to let the molecules climb up the well at leastern a little little bit, so that they have the right to slide about each other.

If we attract a "liquid" line approximating how much power that would certainly take, it could look something prefer this:

*

The red line mirrors the average kinetic power needed for the pposts to pull apart just a little - enough that they deserve to "slide" roughly each various other - yet not so much that there is any kind of substantial room in between them. The elevation of this line compared to the bottom of the well (times Avogadro"s number) is the enthalpy of fusion.

What if we want to vaporize the substance?

In a gas, the molecules are complimentary to relocate and are very much apart

As the kinetic power rises, eventually there is sufficient that the molecules can actually fly acomponent (their radial separation ca technique infinity). That line might look somepoint choose this:

*

I have actually attracted the line a little little shy of the "zero" suggest - where the average molecule would gain to unlimited distance - because kinetic energies follow a statistical distribution, which suggests that some are greater than average, some are lower, and also appropriate about this suggest is wright here sufficient molecules would be able to vaporize that we would certainly call it a phase change. Depfinishing on the specific substance, the line can be higher or lower.

In any type of situation, the elevation of this line compared to the bottom of the well (times Avogadro"s number) is the enthalpy of vaporization.

See more: Solving For A Reactant In A Solution, Solving For A Reactant In Solution

As you have the right to check out, it"s a lot higher up. The reason is that for melting, the molecules simply require enough energy to "slide" around each various other, while for vaporization, they require sufficient power to entirely escape the well. This suggests that the enthalpy of vaporization is always going to be greater than the enthalpy of fusion.