Figures & data
Table 1. Molecular weight, critical properties and Racket parameters of fatty acids.
Table 2. Comparison of the average density values between five vegetable oils at different temperatures.
Table 3. Intercept (), slope (
) and correlation coefficient (
) values corresponding to the empirical equation to predict density of each vegetable oil.
Figure 1. Density values of five vegetable oils from room temperature to the smoke point of each oil.
![Figure 1. Density values of five vegetable oils from room temperature to the smoke point of each oil.](/cms/asset/590f1e4e-2dd2-4dd0-b242-1e31f859ca26/ljfp_a_1360905_f0001_b.gif)
Table 4. Comparison of the average surface tension values between five vegetable oils at different temperatures measured using KRÜSS and ramé-hart goniometers.
Table 5. Intercept (), slope (
) and correlation coefficient (
) values corresponding to the empirical equation to predict surface tension of each vegetable oil.
Figure 2. Surface tension values of five vegetable oils from room temperature to each oil’s smoke point determined using a KRÜSS goniometer.
![Figure 2. Surface tension values of five vegetable oils from room temperature to each oil’s smoke point determined using a KRÜSS goniometer.](/cms/asset/b57c9fd5-728d-4284-91e9-59614cfd7dc5/ljfp_a_1360905_f0002_b.gif)
Table 6. Comparison of the average viscosity values between five vegetable oils over a range of temperatures.
Figure 3. Viscosity values determined for five vegetable oils from room temperature to the smoke point of each oil.
![Figure 3. Viscosity values determined for five vegetable oils from room temperature to the smoke point of each oil.](/cms/asset/6ea0d4ab-f6c1-4991-86bd-75e641259e61/ljfp_a_1360905_f0003_b.gif)
Table 7. Parameters and
, and correlation coefficient (
) values corresponding to the empirical equation to predict viscosity for each vegetable oil.
Table 8. Molecular weight, critical temperature, and critical pressure of five vegetable oils.
Table 9. Predicted density values for each vegetable oil by the modified Rackett equation and their corresponding percentage error.
Figure 4. Comparison between density experimental values of A) Canola oil, and B) Soybean oil and their corresponding predicted values by the modified Racket equation.
![Figure 4. Comparison between density experimental values of A) Canola oil, and B) Soybean oil and their corresponding predicted values by the modified Racket equation.](/cms/asset/5d00c05a-1a1c-49c2-8682-7f61544919b5/ljfp_a_1360905_f0004_b.gif)
Figure 5. Comparison between surface tension experimental values obtained by KRÜSS goniometer of A) Canola oil, and B) Soybean oil and their corresponding predicted values by the Eötvös equation and the modified Racket- Eötvös equations.
![Figure 5. Comparison between surface tension experimental values obtained by KRÜSS goniometer of A) Canola oil, and B) Soybean oil and their corresponding predicted values by the Eötvös equation and the modified Racket- Eötvös equations.](/cms/asset/e0e6bb96-7634-4bd6-b892-ffee59a621f6/ljfp_a_1360905_f0005_b.gif)
Table 10. Predicted surface tension values for each vegetable oil by the Eötvös equation (KE = 6.2 dynes∙cm/mol2/3∙K) and their corresponding percentage error comparing with experimental data obtained using KRÜSS goniometer.
Table 11. Parameters ,
and
corresponding to the modified Andrade equation used to predict the viscosity of each vegetable oil.
Table 12. Predicted dynamic viscosity values for each vegetable oil by the modified Andrade equation and their corresponding percentage error.
Figure 6. Comparison between viscosity experimental values of A) Canola oil, and B) Soybean oil and their corresponding predicted values by the modified Andrade equation.
![Figure 6. Comparison between viscosity experimental values of A) Canola oil, and B) Soybean oil and their corresponding predicted values by the modified Andrade equation.](/cms/asset/ed6fcef0-50ae-49a1-ad86-11268d7f6641/ljfp_a_1360905_f0006_b.gif)